Libertarians are left out of the weekly “Debate This” page

Over the last couple of weeks, the Statesman has been running a series of opinion articles entitled “Debate This,” where a topic is selected and then various opinions on the topic are discussed. Each time one of these articles has run, I have noted a rather glaring omission. The articles are typically divided into two sections, one for “What are Republicans thinking?” and one for “What are Democrats thinking?” Conspicuously absent is a third section entitled “What are Libertarians thinking?”

In Utah, Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson polls at 23% and is in a statistical dead-heat with Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, according to recent data from the Washington Post, yet the Statesman doesn’t appear to be interested in what Libertarians might have to say on the subject of immigration, Syrian refugees, or any other topic. As further evidence of the Statesman’s sub-standard reporting on Johnson and other non-establishment candidates, a September 1st article on the election mentioned “splitting the Republican vote between Evan McMillan [sic], Donald Trump, and Jonathan Johnson.” Last I checked, Jonathan Johnson is not running for President, but he did lose the Republican primary to incumbent Gary Herbert in Utah’s gubernatorial race.

Almost one in four Utah voters supports Gary Johnson, and since he polls best among voters under age 35, often coming in second or sometimes first place in various polls of that demographic, it’s not inconceivable that as many as a third of USU students may be considering voting for someone other than a Republican or a Democrat in this year’s presidential election, whether it’s Johnson or another candidate.  In Utah, and on USU’s campus specifically, the presidential election is at least a three-way race, and not just in a theoretical sense.  This is significant, yet the Statesman seems to have whiffed on covering this substantial shift in political opinions among USU students and the public at large.

I’m not suggesting that the Statesman staff are part of some establishment conspiracy to limit media coverage of the ideas of third party candidates such as Johnson, Stein, and McMullin; rather, it’s probably just a case of doing what’s always been done because it’s always been done that way.  However, aren’t universities supposed to be places where we are forward thinking, and open to interrogating and challenging the established norms? I would encourage the Statesman editorial staff to broaden its horizons when it comes to coverage of political issues, and make a concerted effort to accurately reflect the diverse community of ideas found on our campus.

—Joe Furse is a graduate assistant for the Technology and Engineering Education program.