Believe it or not, there were actually more than two candidates in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.

However, if you were only to get your information from mainstream cable news or corporate daily newspapers, one may not realize that. Many children are brought up to believe that in this country, you have a choice between Republicans and Democrats. And that’s the way it is.

“Who are you voting for,” one 15-year-old product of the Rutherford County schools asked a voter.

“Gary Johnson,” the voter replied.

“No, I mean for president. Between Obama and Romney,” the youngster said.

“He is running for president. There are actually more than two people you can vote for.”

“Oh.”

He is not alone in his surprise that voters do indeed have choices beyond the two dominant parties.

In the 2012 presidential election, Jill Stein of the Green Party, Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party, Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party joined the more famous Republican and Democrat on Tennessee’s ballot.

Yet even some voters who tried to educate themselves on the election did not see some of these names until the voting machine.

Jill Stein

“It’s fair to say that democracy is under lockdown,” Stein says. “Media have been working very hard to suppress knowledge that there are alternative candidates out there . . . The state of our media is emblematic of the state of our democracy—it’s bought and paid for.”

Timothy Meredith, organizer of the Rutherford County Libertarians, agrees that Johnson and other candidates do not receive the coverage they deserve, but also says that voters must take responsibility to educate themselves about the candidates and issues facing the country.

“I certainly don’t think the media did a good job at all in covering Gary Johnson. They should have covered him being stonewalled out of the debates,” Meredith says. “People do need to be more aware of third party candidates and not be apathetic to giving them their votes.

“Another big underlying issue is the lack of participation in primaries/caucuses by both citizens and the media. For example, Ron Paul won many of the state conventions and primaries, but was not even covered in the media. The actions at the RNC, which many would consider fraud, were not covered. These were actions that quite literally were not allowing Ron Paul delegates to speak his name on microphones, not allowing Ron Paul merchandise such as shirts/signs (inside and outside), performed teleprompted “rules changes” votes in which a seemingly majority at the convention said ‘no’. There are videos on YouTube of his supporters being arrested, beaten, spit on, and many other atrocious actions in state after state. Ron Paul is certainly one of the guiding figures for libertarians, more so than even Gary Johnson. But veering back on course, I wish voters were more educated, not just about the presidential races, but also about the Congressional races where it matters even more.”

Breaking from the national trend, though, was The Chattanooga Times Free Press, whose Free Press editorial page went against the mainstream grain to actually endorse Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico and author of Seven Principles of Good Government.

Gary Johnson

“The Republican Party nominee has failed to demonstrate a consistent commitment to conservative principles. As a result of his failure to provide clear methods for reducing the size and scope of the federal government, unwillingness to address structural flaws with entitlement programs, reliance on government to intervene in issues best left to families and individuals, and sporadic support of the Constitution and America’s founding principles, Mitt Romney is too flawed to earn the Free Press‘ endorsement,” stated the editorial. “As a result, the Free Press editorial page endorses Libertarian Party presidential candidate Gary Johnson for President of the United States . . . Johnson understands that government spending, unsustainable bailouts and stimulus schemes only lead to more unemployment, a higher national debt, a weakened dollar and a less stable economy.

“(Some) claim that it is wise to vote for the lesser of two evils. The problem with that, however, is that voting for evil only leads to more evil. A vote is an affirmation that a candidate is on the right track, but Barack Obama and Mitt Romney clearly aren’t when it comes to limiting government, promoting individual liberty and protecting free market economic principles.”

(read the full editorial here)

This piece was met with some criticism from those saying Johnson did not have a legitimate shot at winning, but with some applause as well from others.

“Good for you! I think this sets a courageous precedent for others to step out, speak up and not settle for the lesser of two evils. An editorial decision like this can really begin to broaden and deepen the discussion about what principles and values are important to us, what meaningful policy differences should matter, and bring into sharp focus just how limited, superficial and short-sighted our political discourse really has been,” commented Times Free Press reader Chris Brooks.

A difficult conundrum for non-Republicans and -Democrats is that it is necessary to receive some media coverage in order to reach large numbers of voters with one’s ideas, but in turn it is necessary to build a following in order to garner media coverage.

“The perpetual chicken-and-egg questions for news outlets like USA Today is how much attention should be paid to candidates who have little chance of winning the election but whose chances of garnering more support could rise with increased press coverage,” wrote Elia Powers in a piece for the American Journalism Review, “The Lonely Life of a Third-Party Presidential Candidate.”

The piece did point out that USA Today gave Johnson and Stein more credence than many other organizations did, allowing them to respond to questions from the presidential debates (between only Obama and Romney onstage) on the editorial page.

“I’m sympathetic to [candidates’] concern that they can’t become major candidates without coverage, but it’s not our job to help them become major candidates,” USA Today Politics Editor Paul Singer says.

In addition to USA Today opening its editorial page for the debate questions, Powers also cited Democracy Now!, an advertising-free website and video news hour, and C-SPAN, the non-profit Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network, which aired a third-party presidential debate in late October, as other examples of quality coverage of multiple candidates.

Still, when many pre-election public opinion polls only include and gauge interest in Obama and Romney, the results will naturally exclude the names of Jill Stein, Virgil Goode, Gary Johnson and Rocky Anderson.

And while the Republicans and the Democrats will continue attack one another, sling mud and engage in heated cable television debates, when taken in the context of the widely ranging views of the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, the Pacifist Party, the Raza Unida Party, the Prohibition Party, the Socialist Workers Party and the Pirate Party (it’s legit, look it up; come to find out, I share a lot of views with the Pirate Party), to many, the words of former alternative-party candidate (and segregation enthusiast) George Wallace ring true, “There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the Republicans and Democrats.”

Johnson said before Election Day 2012, it didn’t matter if Romney or Obama were elected; either way, the American people get the same result: “continued unsustainable spending.”