This year’s presidential election is a year of firsts, but can it really be a year of change? 

Hilary Clinton was the first woman to win Iowa. Ted Cruz was the first Hispanic to win any caucus and Bernie Sanders is the first Jewish American to win New Hampshire. 

Strategies have diversified. Cruz has made landmark progress in this respect using voter universes. Each voter universe refers to a group of people that care the most about one single issue. 

The concept itself is not new, but he has expanded on it by being concerned with over 150 voter universes. Mitt Romney worried about only two in his 2012 run.

Sanders has made a considerable amount of money using ActBlue, the political equivalent of Kickstarter, and refusing Super PACs. 

Donald Trump has spent a surprisingly small amount of money and has instead focused on keeping himself in the news constantly via Twitter and explosive rallies. 

Jeb Bush spent some of the most money in the race, with meager polls figures to show for it.

Electorates have changed and become bigger. Washington outsiders are more than a running side show. Sanders and Trump appeal to the angry working class of primarily white voters. The same appeal that elected Barack Obama-with his tagline of hope and change is still driving this election, but now it sounds more like anger and revolution.

All of the new changes in the election are interesting, but one of candidates has to win to make an impact.

All of the progress and advances will mean nothing if the candidate championing those changes loses. Campaign managers and strategists take idea from winners, not hopeful second-place holders. This is America, and we love a winner.

The American political system only works when an informed public makes its voice heard.