Three's a Crowd

     I did not know there was a presidential debate on Tuesday until I was told about it yesterday. From the show of hands or lack of same, neither did most people. The Republicans were not present. Neither were the Democrats. So who could have possibly been there?

     Just the other four candidates, that's all. No one you'd know.

     Held in Chicago, the debate featured would-be presidents from the Green, Libertarian, Constitution, and Justice parties. I'd only ever heard of two of those before I read this New York Times article. I had never heard any of the candidates' names. And I wouldn't have had a clue what their views were like without this article. I wouldn't have expected the Green Party to have a stance on much besides the environment. I would never have expected anyone so opposed to the idea of the melting pot to be a part of a party called Constitution. And the only time the Libertarian party was mentioned to me was by an adult, to remain nameless, who compared them to anarchists.

     Why does America pay so little attention to these "also-runnings"? In the land of the voice of the many, how can two people monopolize our attention? Consider the effort these four people have gone to, and are going to, and how they must feel, being marginalized like that. Consider also that, in their debate, the third-party candidates covered issues that have not been touched by the the other two. Furthermore, note the lack of theatricality in their speeches, and how it contrasts to Obama's and Romney's incessant back-and-forth.

     What are your opinions of the third-party presidential candidates? Are they an important part of America and minority viewpoint, or are they wasting their time and should just give up? How do they affect the election? Do they at all?