Obama seemed like a cure-all for the country's ailments. His mixed-race background reinforced the idea he could bridge white and black America. His public speaking exuded intelligence without coming across as condescending and his rhetoric of "change" seemed to reassure a beleaguered middle class that the USA was on an upswing.

Change did come in Obama's first term, but it wasn't the change Americans wanted.

Faced with the realization that the president could only accomplish so much and, more importantly, that a top-down approach to change wasn't going to cut it, the American people turned towards grassroots activism. This is where Occupy Wall Street, or OWS comes in.

We could spend days discussing the various ways OWS changed the conversation surrounding wealth without accomplishing any tangible goals. That's not what's important here. What's important is understanding how OWS coupled with an Obama presidency allowed someone like Bernie Sanders, a candidate that would have been totally unelectable in 2004, the ability to actually win states and garner the momentum he currently has.

OWS, despite all its shortcomings, tapped into a resentment felt by the liberal middle class after they watched their golden calf bail out the very banks that enabled the housing bubble to tank the economy in 2007 and 2008. Realizing their faith in the Democratic Party as an establishment had failed them, it was only a matter of time before someone like Bernie Sanders would take the stage. 

Here was a candidate that existed outside the establishment and who seemed to actually live up to his expressed principles. More importantly, his promises of instituting a revolution galvanized the defeated masses of OWS and the liberal millennial vote who watched as "traditional" presidents like Bush and Obama handicapped their future. Whether Sanders can meaningfully live up to this cult of personality remains to be seen.

To that end, where does someone like Donald Trump fit into all this? Well, it's the same principle really. 

Tap into the anger of a disaffected part of the population and milk it for all it's worth. The only difference is that instead of capitalizing on those disappointed by the Obama administration that could have been, Trump is tapping into anxieties felt by those who feel threatened by the dramatic culture shifts, outsourced jobs and slowing growth that have all taken place during Obama's tenure.

To be sure, the Republican Party helped sow the seeds of a Trump insurgency. By embracing Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate in 2008, the GOP legitimized the fringe elements of conservative America, opening up a whole bloc of support that Trump eagerly exploited. This is but one part of the rise of Trump.

The other part is the aforementioned anxiety. Race hasn't become any less controversial, immigration and outsourcing threatens to take away more blue collar jobs and more and more Americans feel as if their elected leaders can't do anything to help their plight. Faced with these troubling developments, Trump's supporters are an expression of a resurgence in American authoritarianism.

Briefly stated, Trump's ascent reflects a desire among large swathes of Americans for a return to order, stability and respect for authority. The Republican establishment has failed to address these concerns, so they turn towards an outsider believing it's better than remaining with the current lot of Republicans.

None of this will go away when the dust settles and someone is sitting in the Oval Office, regardless of whether it's Trump or Sanders or neither. Their success - and their progress this far into a presidential election is a success no matter how you look at it - represents a critical juncture in American politics. 

Sanders may have gotten his revolution but I doubt either he or Trump know just how significantly they've changed the political landscape.