Column: The new cliche: being the outsider

“Outsider” is a term that used to have some meaning to it. If you were an outsider in a group, it meant you were a new face that raised eyebrows as you fought against the status quo. But along with that came a degree of appreciation for standing up for your differences, and even provided a window for success.

In the 1992 presidential election, we had Ross Perot, the Texas billionaire running on cutting government waste and boosting efficiency.

Now, merely 13 months until the 2016 presidential election, “outsider” is as overused in politics as kissing babies and claiming to care about the middle class.

For the Republicans, Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina have been labeled as outsiders by journalists and voters, primarily because they lack public office experience, running as fresh faces in a GOP still struggling to find an identity.

On the Democrat side, Bernie Sanders has been given this title for his more populist approach to issues facing the American populace. This includes supporting a national $15 per hour minimum living wage. 

But while each brings something unique to the election, none of their actions justify the label “outsider.”

For Fiorina and Carson, their outsider statuses rely mainly on their careers outside of politics. Fiorina is the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, while Carson is known for his neurosurgery work at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

However, their positions are mostly typical Republican ideals. The tax code is horrid. We need a strong military. Abortion is wrong. Nothing we have not seen before, and not challenging the dominant status.

For Sanders, he has proven himself to be different, running on a platform of populism sprinkled with socialistic positions. With policies like his plan for tuition free-education, he has proven himself to be a real challenger.

Yet at the same time, Sanders has served in Congress since 1991, becoming a senator in 2007. He is a senior member of the Senate, and is serving as the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee.

The only candidate worth the title of “outsider” is Trump, but it is a questionable distinction. Trump’s positions have changed so much even since he joined the race in June, it is hard to tell where he stands on a fair number of issues. He could fit the outsider persona, but the lack of a consistency makes this current labeling unclear.

Each of these individuals brings something unique to the race to the White House, and each should highlight their differences. However, certain outlets should be careful about calling people “outsiders” when candidates may not fit the definition. 

These candidates surely have their differences, but none are new enough to completely change the culture in Washington. While the label may catch the average person’s eye, it will not be enough to assure these people will indeed act like outsiders if they are sworn into office.