From Sanders to Mamdani and Trump to Vance, parallel insurgencies reshape America’s political, economic, and institutional landscape.
By Ajay Raju
The decade spanning 2016 to 2025 has witnessed the emergence of two transformative anti-establishment political movements that have fundamentally reshaped American politics: Bernie Sanders’ democratic socialist insurgency culminating in Zohran Mamdani’s New York City mayoral primary victory, and Donald Trump’s MAGA revolution that has redefined the Republican Party. Both movements, despite their ideological opposition, tapped into profound dissatisfaction with the political status quo and economic inequality. Interestingly, both movements share striking structural similarities while representing fundamentally different visions for America’s future.
As the MAGA movement prepares for its post-Trump era with JD Vance and Marco Rubio positioned as potential successors, the democratic socialist movement faces its greatest test yet—whether it can survive and thrive against an increasingly institutionalized and powerful conservative populist coalition that has proven its electoral dominance.
The Economic Context: A Nation in Transition
The 2016 movements emerged from a backdrop of economic anxiety and social transformation. The Great Recession of 2008 had left lasting scars on the American psyche, with median household income still below pre-recession levels in many communities. Income inequality had reached levels not seen since the 1920s, with the top 1% of earners controlling approximately 20% of total income. Manufacturing employment had declined from 17.3 million jobs in 2000 to 12.3 million by 2016, devastating communities in the Rust Belt that would prove crucial to both movements.
Student debt had ballooned to over $1.3 trillion nationally, affecting 44 million borrowers and creating a generation of young adults facing unprecedented financial burdens. Meanwhile, healthcare costs continued to rise, with medical bankruptcies affecting hundreds of thousands of families annually despite the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
Sanders’ Democratic Socialist Movement: Grassroots Insurgency
Bernie Sanders’ 2016 campaign represented the most successful democratic socialist movement in modern American history. Despite beginning with virtually no name recognition outside Vermont and facing a formidable establishment candidate in Hillary Clinton, Sanders’ message of economic populism resonated with millions of Americans.
The campaign’s fundraising model became legendary in political circles. Sanders raised over $228 million, with an average donation of just $27. More than 2.8 million individual donors contributed to his campaign, with many giving multiple times. This grassroots funding model allowed Sanders to compete financially with Clinton while maintaining ideological independence from corporate interests.
Ajay Raju: Predicting future economic success of cities (June 26, 2025)
Sanders won 23 primaries and caucuses, capturing 43% of pledged delegates and receiving over 13 million votes. His appeal was particularly strong among younger voters, winning 73% of voters under 30 in primary contests. The movement’s geographic strength lay in states like New Hampshire, where he won by 22 percentage points, and Michigan, where his upset victory demonstrated the power of his economic message in post-industrial communities.
The policy platform Sanders championed included Medicare for All, free public college tuition, a $15 minimum wage, and aggressive action on climate change. His criticism of “millionaires and billionaires” and calls to break up big banks resonated with voters who felt left behind by decades of neoliberal economic policies.
The movement’s impact extended far beyond the 2016 cycle. Organizations like Our Revolution, Justice Democrats, and the Democratic Socialists of America saw dramatic membership increases. But, the Sanders campaign’s most lasting contribution was its role in revitalizing the Democratic Socialists of America. DSA membership peaked at 95,000 members following the 2016 election, representing exponential growth from its pre-Sanders membership of approximately 6,000. This organizational infrastructure became crucial for translating ideological enthusiasm into electoral victories.
The movement’s next breakthrough came with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s 2018 primary victory over incumbent Joe Crowley in New York’s 14th congressional district. Her victory, achieved with just $194,000 in campaign spending against Crowley’s $3.4 million, demonstrated that grassroots organizing could overcome financial disadvantages. Ocasio-Cortez’s win was followed by the elections of other DSA-backed candidates including Rashida Tlaib, Cori Bush, and Jamaal Bowman, creating a progressive “Squad” in Congress.
The Mamdani Moment: 2025 as a Watershed
Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City’s 2025 Democratic mayoral primary may represent the movement’s most significant electoral achievement to date, as the young progressive candidate defeated former Governor Andrew Cuomo in what many considered an impossible upset.
Mamdani’s victory is particularly significant for several reasons. At 33 years old, he would become the youngest New York City mayor in more than a century and its first Muslim and Indian American mayor if elected. His campaign exemplified the movement’s evolution from Sanders’ working-class populism to a more diverse, multicultural approach to democratic socialism that resonates with America’s changing demographics.
As a member of both the Democratic Party and the Democratic Socialists of America, Mamdani represents the institutionalization of democratic socialist politics within mainstream Democratic structures. His platform, described as “really progressive, liberal left-wing platform of the kind that we probably haven’t ever seen in New York,” includes proposals for universal childcare, city-owned grocery stores, a Green New Deal for New York, and significant rent control measures.
Movement Characteristics and Evolution
The democratic socialist movement’s success stems from several key characteristics that have evolved since 2016:
Clear Messaging and Policy Specificity: Unlike traditional leftist movements that often remained abstract, democratic socialists have consistently offered concrete policy proposals. Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and housing as a human right have become specific legislative goals rather than aspirational slogans.
Multimedia Activism and Digital Organizing: The movement has effectively utilized social media and digital organizing tools. Ocasio-Cortez’s Instagram Live sessions and TikTok presence have made democratic socialist ideas accessible to younger audiences, while sophisticated digital organizing has enabled campaigns to compete with better-funded opponents.
Coalition Building Across Demographics: The movement has successfully built coalitions that transcend traditional demographic boundaries. Sanders won decisive victories among young voters of all races in 2016 and 2020, while candidates like Mamdani have built multicultural coalitions that include working-class communities, young professionals, and activist organizations.
Electoral Strategy Combined with Movement Building: Rather than focusing solely on presidential politics, the movement has invested in local and state-level campaigns, school board races, and district attorney contests. This approach has created a pipeline of progressive officials and demonstrated that democratic socialist policies can work at the local level.
Institutional Impact and Policy Influence: The movement’s influence extends beyond electoral victories to substantive policy changes. The concept of Medicare for All, once considered radical, now has support from 112 House Democrats and 14 Senate Democrats. The Green New Deal, initially dismissed as unrealistic, influenced the Biden administration’s climate policies and infrastructure investments.
President Trump’s MAGA Movement — A Political Transformation
The Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement represents one of the most significant political realignments in modern American history. What began as Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign slogan evolved into a broad-based populist movement that fundamentally reshaped the Republican Party and American conservative politics.
The MAGA movement’s origins can be traced to decades of economic transformation that left many Americans feeling left behind. The decline of manufacturing, the effects of globalization, and growing income inequality created fertile ground for an anti-establishment message. In the Rust Belt states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, factory closures and job losses to overseas production became symbols of a broader sense that the American economy no longer worked for ordinary workers.
Trump’s message of economic nationalism resonated particularly strongly in these communities. His promises to renegotiate trade deals like NAFTA, impose tariffs on foreign goods, and bring manufacturing jobs back to America offered a stark contrast to the free-trade consensus that had dominated both parties for decades. The appeal was not just economic but emotional — it offered hope for the restoration of communities and ways of life that had been in decline.
Ajay Raju: Traits that fueled America’s economic dominance from industrial revolution to internet era can transform cities like Philadelphia (June 19, 2025)
Statistical evidence supports the movement’s connection to economic anxiety. Trump performed exceptionally well in counties with high rates of manufacturing job losses and lower median incomes. His victory in traditionally Democratic strongholds like Mahoning County, Ohio, where he reduced a 28-point Democratic margin to just 3 points, demonstrated the power of his economic message in industrial communities.
Beyond economics, the MAGA movement tapped into cultural anxieties about rapid social change. Immigration, shifting demographics, and evolving social norms created a sense among some Americans that their country was becoming unrecognizable. Trump’s rhetoric about immigration—including his promise to build a border wall and implement travel restrictions—appealed to voters concerned about cultural change and national identity.
The movement’s base was particularly concentrated among white voters without college degrees, a demographic that had been drifting away from the Democratic Party for years. Trump won 67% of white non-college voters, a significant improvement over previous Republican candidates. This represented not just a partisan shift but a class-based realignment that cut across traditional party lines.
Rural America became another cornerstone of the MAGA coalition. Small towns and rural communities, often struggling with population loss, economic decline, and reduced political influence, found in Trump a champion who promised to restore their prominence in American life. The geographic distribution of Trump’s support created a stark urban-rural divide that will define American politics for years to come.
MAGA’s Political Strategy and Media Dynamics
President Trump’s political success is enabled by his mastery of modern media dynamics and his willingness to break conventional political rules. His use of Twitter and other social media platforms allows him to communicate directly with supporters, bypassing traditional media gatekeepers. His controversial statements, rather than damaging his campaign, often generates massive media coverage that would have cost millions in advertising dollars.
The 2016 Trump campaign’s efficiency was remarkable—spending only $322 million compared to Hillary Clinton’s $563 million while achieving victory. This demonstrated that in the modern media environment, earned media and viral content could be more valuable than traditional campaign spending. Trump’s rallies became central to building and maintaining movement enthusiasm, creating a sense of community and shared purpose among supporters.
The MAGA movement also benefited from the fragmentation of the media landscape. Conservative media outlets and online communities provided spaces where MAGA supporters could find validation for their views and connect with like-minded individuals. This created an ecosystem that sustained the movement beyond individual election cycles.
MAGA’s Institutionalization
The MAGA movement’s most lasting impact may be its transformation of the Republican Party. Traditional conservative priorities like free trade, foreign intervention, and fiscal restraint have been supplanted by nationalism, populism, and cultural conservatism. The movement purged or marginalized Republican leaders who opposed Trump, creating a new orthodoxy centered on loyalty to President Trump personally and adherence to MAGA principles.
This transformation extends beyond the party leadership to its voter base. Long-standing Republican constituencies are joined by new voters drawn by Trump’s populist message. Working-class Democrats switched parties, while some suburban Republicans moved toward the Democrats, creating a new electoral map that scrambled traditional assumptions about American politics.
Once in power, the MAGA movement translated its campaign promises into concrete policies. The administration renegotiated NAFTA into the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, imposed tariffs on Chinese goods, upended traditional geopolitics, introduced new America-first economic priorities, and implemented various immigration restrictions. The appointment of conservative judges, including three Supreme Court justices, advanced the movement’s cultural agenda.
Ajay Raju: The AI transformation: Reshaping human experience beyond recognition (June 30, 2025)
The 2016 election demonstrated the power of anti-establishment sentiment while highlighting the constraints of the American electoral system. Sanders’ movement succeeded in pushing the Democratic Party leftward on economic issues but fell short of capturing the nomination, partly due to superdelegates and the party’s institutional advantages for establishment candidates.
Trump’s victory, despite losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, illustrated how the Electoral College can amplify geographically concentrated support. His 304 electoral votes came from narrow victories in key swing states, with a combined margin of fewer than 78,000 votes in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin determining the outcome.
The Parallel Insurgencies: Similarities
Both movements have had lasting impacts on their respective parties. The Democratic Party has embraced versions of many Sanders policies, including a $15 minimum wage, expanded healthcare coverage, and aggressive climate action. The 2020 Democratic primary featured multiple candidates advocating for Medicare for All and other progressive priorities.
The Republican Party has been thoroughly transformed by Trump’s movement. Traditional conservative priorities like fiscal responsibility and free trade have been de-emphasized in favor of immigration restriction, trade protectionism, and cultural nationalism. Trump’s endorsement remains crucial for Republican primary candidates.
The structural similarities between these movements are remarkable:
Anti-Elite Messaging: Both movements successfully positioned themselves as opponents of a corrupt establishment. Sanders railed against the “billionaire class” and corporate Democrats, while Trump attacked the “deep state” and Republican establishment figures.
Populist Economics: Both movements promised to restore economic opportunity to forgotten Americans, though they prescribed different solutions. Sanders focused on economic inequality and corporate power, while Trump emphasized trade deals, foreign direct investments, tax cuts, onshoring manufacturing, deregulation, and immigration’s impact on workers.
Media Disruption: Both movements bypassed traditional media gatekeepers. Sanders utilized grassroots organizing and social media, while Trump mastered Twitter and generated constant media coverage through celebrity and controversy.
Coalition Building: Both movements expanded beyond traditional party bases. Sanders energized young voters across racial lines, while Trump attracted working-class voters who had previously voted Democratic.
However, their trajectories diverged dramatically. Trump won the presidency, while Sanders lost the primary. This early success gave MAGA a crucial advantage: access to the levers of power and the ability to reshape institutions from within.
MAGA’s Electoral Success
The MAGA movement’s electoral success has been more comprehensive and sustained than the democratic socialist movement’s achievements. According to NBC News polling, 71% of Republicans and 36% of Americans now identify as MAGA supporters, representing a significant expansion from President Trump’s initial base.
President Trump’s 2024 victory, while narrow at 1.62% of the popular vote, demonstrated the movement’s staying power. More importantly, Trump won rural areas by 40 points (69%-29), showing the movement’s geographic consolidation in key electoral territories.
The MAGA movement has achieved what democratic socialists have struggled to accomplish: consistent victories in competitive general elections. While democratic socialists have won primaries in heavily Democratic districts, MAGA candidates have won presidential elections, gubernatorial races, and Senate seats in purple states.
The Next Generation: Vance and Rubio vs. Progressive Succession
The MAGA movement’s institutional success has created clear succession planning that democratic socialists lack. Trump has elevated both JD Vance and Marco Rubio as potential 2028 successors, with Vance serving as finance chair for the Republican National Committee.
As Trump’s vice president, JD Vance is positioned as “the heir presumptive and odds-on favorite for the 2028 nomination.” This represents a level of institutional continuity that democratic socialists cannot match. The movement has successfully captured the Republican Party apparatus, giving future MAGA leaders access to: established fundraising networks (Vance’s role as RNC finance chair keeps him connected to the party’s top donors); institutional support (Control of party machinery at federal and state levels); media infrastructure (a sophisticated ecosystem of conservative media outlets and influencers); and organizational capacity (proven ability to mobilize voters across diverse geographic regions).
Democratic Socialist Limitations
The democratic socialist movement’s electoral success has been more limited geographically and institutionally. While candidates like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani have achieved breakthrough victories, these successes have been concentrated in heavily Democratic urban areas.
DSA membership peaked at 95,000 and has declined to 80,000 members as of June 2025, showing organizational challenges that contrast with MAGA’s expanding base. The movement’s candidates often struggle in general elections, particularly in competitive districts where the “socialist” label remains politically toxic.
Democratic Socialist movement faces significant disadvantages in institutional competition:
Lack of Clear Succession: Unlike MAGA’s clear Vance-Rubio succession track, democratic socialists have no equivalent institutional pathway. Sanders is aging out of leadership, and figures like AOC, while prominent, lack the institutional positioning that comes with holding executive power.
Geographic Concentration: Democratic socialist success remains concentrated in urban Democratic strongholds, limiting the movement’s ability to compete in the Electoral College system that advantages rural and suburban areas where MAGA thrives.
Institutional Resistance: The Democratic Party establishment remains hostile to democratic socialist candidates, creating internal obstacles that MAGA candidates don’t face within the Republican Party.
Other Existential Threats Facing Democratic Socialism
As MAGA consolidates its institutional advantages, democratic socialists face multiple existential threats that could eliminate the movement as a significant political force:
The Pro-Israel Lobby: AIPAC’s $100 million spending in 2024 achieved devastating results against progressive candidates. The organization’s super PAC defeated prominent Squad members Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush, with Bowman’s district flooded with $12 million in attack advertisements. All 129 AIPAC-backed Democrats won their 2024 primaries, demonstrating systematic capability to eliminate progressive voices. The financial warfare tactics—often outspending progressive candidates by 10-to-1 margins—could create a chilling effect that deters future candidates.
Republican Electoral Warfare: The MAGA movement’s control of the Republican Party apparatus creates powerful opposition to democratic socialist candidates. Democratic socialist candidates struggle in general elections, even in districts where they win primaries. The “socialist” label remains politically toxic for swing voters, particularly in suburban districts Democrats need to maintain congressional majorities. Republican-controlled state governments systematically block progressive local policies, limiting the effectiveness of democratic socialist governance. This creates a governing trap where progressive officials can win elections but cannot implement their agenda. The Republican Party also has sophisticated opposition research capabilities that can effectively deploy red-baiting and other attacks against progressive candidates.
Establishment Democrats: Additionally, the business community and moderate Democrats represent interconnected threats to democratic socialist advancement. Corporate super PACs can spend unlimited amounts opposing progressive candidates, while moderate Democrats access corporate funding that democratic socialists reject on principle. The Democratic Party establishment controls endorsements, fundraising networks, and volunteer infrastructure that can be mobilized against progressive challengers. Moreover, most mainstream media outlets typically favor moderate Democrats and provide more critical coverage of progressive candidates and policies.
Comparative Movement Dynamics
Most importantly, the fundamental difference between these movements lies in their relationship to existing power structures. MAGA succeeded by capturing the Republican Party rather than building parallel institutions. This approach provided immediate access to electoral machinery, fundraising networks, and media platforms. Trump’s 2016 victory gave the movement control of the federal government, allowing it to reshape institutions from within. The movement’s success in rural and suburban areas provided geographic advantages in the Electoral College system. MAGA candidates could win national elections while losing urban areas where democratic socialists are strongest.
Conversely, Democratic socialists have focused on building parallel institutions (DSA) while challenging the Democratic Party establishment. This approach has created organizational independence but limited institutional power. The movement’s urban concentration provides advantages in House primaries but disadvantages in statewide and national elections.
The movement’s ideological leanings have created electoral disadvantages. While MAGA candidates can moderate their positions for general elections, democratic socialist candidates face pressure to maintain consistency with movement principles.
The Institutional Trap: Success as Weakness
Paradoxically, the democratic socialist movement’s limited electoral success has created new vulnerabilities. As democratic socialists win elections, they face pressure to moderate positions and work within existing systems, potentially alienating the activist base. The transition from opposition to governance presents practical challenges that could discredit the movement if officials fail to deliver on promises. Moreover, electoral success requires increasing resources for campaigns, potentially making the movement more dependent on wealthy donors and less grassroots-oriented.
The Path Forward: Survival in a MAGA Era
The democratic socialist movement’s survival depends on addressing fundamental structural disadvantages while maintaining ideological coherence. The movement must expand beyond urban strongholds to compete in suburban and rural areas where MAGA dominates. Rather than remaining insurgent, democratic socialists may need to engage more strategically with Democratic Party institutions. The movement must build broader coalitions that include moderate Democrats and progressive Republicans and develop concrete policy proposals that address contemporary challenges while remaining true to democratic socialist principles.
The movement also needs to develop clear leadership succession beyond Sanders and establish institutional continuity and resolve ideological tensions that have contributed to membership decline and organizational fragmentation.
The Asymmetric Struggle
The comparison between democratic socialism and MAGA reveals fundamental asymmetries that favor the conservative movement. MAGA’s institutional capture strategy, geographic advantages, and resource superiority create structural challenges that democratic socialists have yet to overcome.
The journey from Sanders to Mamdani represents significant progress for democratic socialism, but this progress pales in comparison to MAGA’s comprehensive institutional capture. As Vance and Rubio prepare for potential 2028 leadership, they inherit advantages that democratic socialist leaders cannot match: executive experience, institutional support, and proven electoral success in competitive environments.
The democratic socialist movement faces an existential moment. The combination of systematic opposition from pro-Israel lobbying groups, corporate interests, and moderate Democrats, combined with MAGA’s institutional advantages, creates a hostile environment for progressive politics.
Whether democratic socialism can survive and thrive in this environment depends on its ability to adapt strategically while maintaining ideological coherence. The movement’s emphasis on ideological purity and grassroots organizing has created passionate supporters but limited institutional power. In contrast, MAGA’s pragmatic approach to power acquisition has created lasting institutional advantages.
The decade-long journey from Sanders to Mamdani may ultimately represent the high-water mark of democratic socialist influence in American politics, rather than the beginning of transformative change. As MAGA consolidates its institutional advantages and prepares for long-term governance, democratic socialists face the challenge of remaining relevant in a political system increasingly dominated by conservative populism.
The battle for America’s future will be fought between these two movements, but the structural advantages lie clearly with MAGA. The democratic socialist movement’s survival depends on recognizing these disadvantages and developing strategies that can compete with an increasingly powerful and institutionalized conservative opposition. The path forward requires strategic adaptation that may conflict with movement principles, creating tensions that could ultimately determine whether democratic socialism remains a significant force in American politics or becomes a historical footnote in the age of Trump.
(Ajay Raju, a venture capitalist and lawyer, hosts Overheard, a peer-to-peer television program for 6ABC, a local television affiliate of Disney covering the Greater Philadelphia region, and is a regular panelist on Inside Story, a Sunday-morning news and roundtable debate show on 6ABC.)