​What we have forgotten

As students visit the polls for early voting, campus is abuzz with political discussion, especially surrounding the two major party presidential candidates. However, despite the pressing issues at stake this election, we have been caught in a firestorm discussing the emails sent by one candidate and lewd and inappropriate comments made by the other. Both of these issues have severe implications for either candidate and ought to be appropriately discussed. However, during this election, sensationalized news stories have continuously overshadowed any discussions about substantive policy. Today, we remind everyone of what has been left unsaid.

Despite the fast-changing news cycle, the media has chosen to repeat the same sound bytes rather than significantly contribute to political discourse. Social media has only exacerbated this problem. While many of the concerns that have been discussed are important, it is paramount to ensure the entire political dialogue surrounding America is not diminished by sensationalism. Russia and ISIS have dominated the national conversation as evidenced by the debates, but even these topics have not received their due and have been discussed in vague (and provocative) terms. While many key issues of the year, including police brutality and immigration, were granted some airtime during the presidential debates, neither the candidates nor the media have truly engaged with these topics to the extent they deserve to be discussed.

Even more interesting this election is what has been pushed to the peripheries of public discourse. Campaign finance and any information surrounding the role of super PACs in politics seemed to vanish when Bernie Sanders left the candidate pool. The privacy violations by the National Security Agency has been fairly untouched by either candidate. The environment once again has received little attention, despite obvious impacts of global climate change. Further, foreign policy in Yemen, abortion, poverty and a host of other topics have been underserved in national political conversations. Perhaps this results from news sources focusing on stories that gain them viewers or only one presidential candidate attempting to discuss policy.

When election is reduced to a few stories on the national level, local elections also do not receive necessary attention. While in North Carolina, House Bill 2 has sparked discussion about the reelection campaign of Pat McCrory against Democrat Roy Cooper, citizens nationwide still lament over picking amongst the presidential candidates without understanding the impact their governors, senators and local representatives have. In some cases, local candidates arguably have much more influence on policies that affect individuals’ daily lives. For example, votes for state representatives affect gerrymandering, which affects how much political power a party possesses. Furthermore, state attorney generals have considerable power in affecting how federal and local laws affect citizens of their state. By allowing the media to dampen our resolve to participate in our local and state politics, we fail to recognize the influence of these politicians on us, and our collective influence on their reelections.

Change begins with each of us taking ownership and advocating for the issues that impact us. Articles abound the internet about existing and potential policy areas, and while the national media coverage may be lacking about particular issues, we should not forego attempts to stay informed. We should discuss concerns we have with our state and nation among our peers and bring especially pressing problems to the attention of local and state representatives. When we decide to hold our representatives accountable for the changes we wish to see, we can begin to slowly shift political discourse in our own way.