Since the beginning of the election cycle, the vast majority of media establishments have predicted an overwhelming victory for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primaries. This is not to say that people do not like Bernie Sanders — by all accounts his supporters are ardent and numerous, compared to the lackluster and complacent conservatism which drives the Hillary campaign — but that his position as an outsider on the left-wing of the Democratic Party and a self-identified “socialist” in a nation defined by anti-communism make his candidacy improbable and a Sanders victory unthinkable. Senator Sanders’s performance has surpassed all expectations, holding his own against Clinton in key battleground states and demonstrating the profound gap between the Democratic Party establishment and its voter base. Sanders has avoiding slipping out of the race and national memory like his former competitors the woefully unprepared and utterly forgettable Jim Webb, Lincoln Chafee, and Martin O’Malley, but he remains 200 delegates behind — not including ‘superdelegates’, a group of party officials not responsible to popular vote — and most sources still predict an inevitable loss to the juggernaut of the Clinton campaign. Although not entirely inaccurate, these expectations do not reflect a depth of analysis befitting the monumental nature of the 2016 Presidential Election. This article will demonstrate that while Hillary Clinton’s superior position is undeniable, her advantages are largely spent at this point in the campaign; a Sanders victory — and possibly a Sanders presidency — is still possible, if not probable. The potential characteristics and challenges of a Clinton or Sanders administration will also be discussed, with emphasis on domestic stability and international relations in a crucial period of global history. This map, showing the county level results of votes in Democratic Primaries, is a good place to start.