Where is, the Hushed and Subdued, Gary Johnson Side of a Story?

There is Hillary Clinton, and there is Donald Trump. There is no one else besides—it seems—in the whole drama of election campaigns, as the runner to the oval office in coming November. On one day Clinton is on the headline, a big colorful photograph on global newspaper front, with her outshining and bespectacled face challenging the stance of her opposition, and the other day there would be Trump responding to the tirade and adding some more of it against her to continue burning the flames of repudiation and defamation. Clintonian philosophy and Trumpism are today’s well celebrated neologisms that are essential to describe the US politics in the heat.

In the flipside, there is Garry Johnson and there is Jill Stein too, but who knows since they remain unheard and neglected? The sad and subdued story of those running for the presidency is never mainstreamed. The third-party candidates are also excluded from the presidential debates being conducted by Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), and supposed to be watched by over 70 million people worldwide.

While it is predictably suited to surmise that no one else other than any of the prominent two will win the election, the equation, however, of their respective ballot-gains would be disrupted should Garry and Jill are given chances to speak upfront. It is because there are Americans who dislike the idea of seeing both Clinton and Trump as a president, and yes there are still some more Americans who are already in line with the alternative parties opining differently to the democratic or the republic. The odds will be that the proportion of the votes will be distributed more to the sidelined candidates if they are rendered to be heard and read through the debates and the mainstream news media.

Simply non-inclusive orthodoxy is nothing less than undemocratic and un-American way of practicing democracy, and it is also an awkward irony to let the world see how the most democratic country of the world is fostering the freedom and liberty that includes right to information and to the speech. They might have good issues and Americans should not be thwarted from their rights to hear what their leaders—all of’em—have, as differences, in plans to forward their country in the modern era. Thus far muted ideologies of Garry and Jill are not there waiting to go benighted in the future past. Clinton or Trump whoever it might be, the win will be more graciously acclaimed if they now play role to debunk the policy veils that fence all-encompassing platform to speak up in the open and which might be equally disseminated across the corners.