EDIT: Just realized you may be talking about "no substantial effect", in which case I agree with you that there are substantial differences. Neither party is of, for, or by the people though.
OK, I see this statement all the time and I just don't understand it. How can you say that when Trump, a man with exactly zero political experience, beat out a lifelong politician and wife of a President, not to mention the half dozen qualified candidates in the primary. Obama beat Clinton in the primary and McCain in the general when his only political experience he had was in the state senate.
If so, I have a few butt coins and a blockchain to sell you.
It reeks of political corruption. Money talks and Trump talked the loudest AND was populist. As a politician, you can't go wrong pandering to the largest groups (e.g. california). Clinton's promises didn't really make any headlines and were saddled by any comparison to Obama's failures to deliver whatever people imagined he was going to do for them.
He was an Illinois Senator from 1997-2004.