This election did not have to end up between the two people who are arguably the worst candidates to ever run for the presidency. Information regarding current affairs on both the national and international levels has never been more available to us than it is today. If the American people set their priorities straight, used the resources available to them, and did their homework, maybe... just maybe... we would have two nominees who don't resemble Will Ferrell's and John C. Reilly's rivaling-idiot characters at the beginning of "Step Brothers."

Unfortunately, one of the grandest determinants of how the American political spectrum works is the idea that we Americans are generally ignorant of the world around us. And, it couldn't be more true. In fact, there is only one level of political discussion that most Americans can add a substance-based idea to: human rights. Ever since we were young schoolchildren, we have had it hammered into our heads that minority groups have been discriminated against all throughout American history. And, rightfully so. These are extremely important issues which continue today, but the problem is that it's the only thing Americans generally understand. For example, Donald Trump has (or, at least, claims to have) many plans for foreign relations and America's economy. Yet, few people, including both his supporters and his opponents, actually know what these plans are, and have an idea of the impact they could have on life in America and abroad. So when someone who actually expresses an in-depth, researched support for Donald Trump's economic or international policies, what is the most common response?

"Yeah, but he's racist."

Hillary Clinton has bold ideas for the economy and relations abroad as well. The problem is that she's an excellent politician. What this means is that, instead of giving considerable attention to these plans, she plays into the narratives that reach Americans on the deepest levels: the idea that there are people in America who hate people of different races, sexual preferences, genders, gender identities, and religions, and that her opponent is a champion for these people. She knows that people are passionate about such issues, and that they generally are not passionate about economic and international issues. This is what is helping her in the general election. Every time Donald Trump has a surge in the general election polls, her campaign brings back this rhetoric, and it works; she flies back up to a solid first place.

Yet, Donald Trump, though a rookie politician with very unorthodox methods of running a campaign, does it the best. As the Republican nominee, he has devoted the majority of his campaign rhetoric to material about Hillary Clinton that has little to do with either of their plans for America. I speak, obviously, of the email situation. It is undeniable that the only reason Americans find her as unappealing as Trump is that her usage of a private server made her look irresponsible and dishonest. This truth, combined with the fact that 90% of the mainstream media is pro-Clinton, is why the untrue stereotype of Trump supporters being complete morons exists; when asked for an opinion about Clinton's economic proposals, a Trump supporter will very often reply that she is an untrustworthy criminal.

Now, I'm not making any generalizations about Trump supporters or Hillary supporters. I know plenty of both and a lot of them have real, smart reasons to support their candidate outside of the civil rights discussion. But, I do think the problem I'm highlighting is prevalent enough to have made Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump the current nominees.

The point I'm making is that people tend to vote for candidates for the wrong reasons. For example, very few people have an understanding of the Syrian Civil War. As an informed, hungry-for-information college student who has spent the last few years doing endless research on political issues, I knew nothing about the Syrian Civil War or Vladimir Putin until I started a political science course this fall. The extent of my understanding of these issues was this: ISIS is bad, and we should therefore bomb them... Oh, and also, Vladimir Putin is a mean man. Now, clearly, these are both true statements, but, that was all I could muster into an opinion on the absolutely vital spectrum of international politics. And, I'm pretty sure that's the reality for a huge percentage of American voters, especially millennials.

While so much information regarding the subjects are out there, I wasn't inclined to research, because they're not issues that anyone talks about. Ask most millennials what it meant for America when Vladimir Putin annexed the Crimean Peninsula. They won't be able to answer the question. On the flip-side, ask most millennials about their opinion on racism in America. Democrats will answer with a book-length response on how the plight of non-whites in America is the just as bad as it was in, say, 1967. Republicans will answer with a book-length response on how racism is no longer an issue in America, and how we should focus our attention toward more important issues, like Syria. Yet, if you continue to ask them questions about Syria, they will draw a blank.

Why?

Three words: the mainstream media. Americans often feel like "experts" on whatever Kool-Aid the MSM is serving them. The media only covers civil rights issues because it's the only thing Americans care about. Civil rights issues are the only thing Americans care about because they're the only thing the media covers.

The cycle continues and continues.

If the media educated America on the economy and international relations like they do about racism, sexism, homophobia, etc, maybe we wouldn't have a Republican nominee who wants to get cozy with Putin, an authoritarian dictator who bombs U.S.-trained Syrian rebels. Or, maybe we wouldn't have a Democratic nominee who was pushed so far left by a socialist and his "revolution" that, in order to get elected, she added a $15/hour federal minimum wage to her platform, because it's the "nice thing to do," even though it also would destroy millions of jobs.

Maybe, if we had a media that told us about how the world works, the Republican Party would have understood during the primaries that the reality of the Syrian Civil War and all of its players is a little too complicated for "I'm gonna bomb the sh*t out of them" to be the most complete and strategic answer that our nominee for commander-in-chief can produce on the topic of ISIS. Maybe, the Democratic Party would have understood in the primaries that socialist tax codes cost taxpayers trillions- yes, trillions, with a 't'- of dollars.

What's the answer? How can we make our political system one where the candidates we nominate aren't idiots hiding under a veil of socially-just "heroism"?

Here's my answer: America, I'm asking you to start doing your research. Yes, social justice is important, but it shouldn't have to come at the expense of our economy, our international relations, or our safety. It's too late for us in this election. But, in four years, we can swallow our pride, admit our ignorance, set our priorities straight, research all the issues, and nominate people who don't just play to crowds, but can actually do good for America and the rest of the world.