It goes without saying -- the District is a town full of Democrats. They occupy the majority of the elected offices, have the most registered voters by a long shot, and reliably vote for Democratic presidential candidates. In the most recent analysis of the voter registry, the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics reported that 73.5 percent of registered voters were Democrats. Republicans could only claim 8 percent, the Statehood Green Party 1.6 percent, and independents 16.8 percent. If it weren't for a provision written into the Home Rule Act that set aside two seats on the D.C. Council for candidates from other parties, Democrats would effectively control the city's legislative process.

Given their sheer numbers, it seems common sense to assume that they'll clean up come election time. And though everyone has a space in their heart for the darkhorse candidates from the other parties, most people know that the September 12 Democratic primary determines the result of the November general election. All told, the chances are that either Adrian Fenty or Linda Cropp will be the District's next mayor.

But regardless of how pre-determined the results of election are, local media have failed in one obvious instance -- they've given almost no coverage to candidates from other parties. In fact, they haven't even paid much attention to Democrats other than Fenty, Cropp, Vincent Orange, Marie Johns, and Michael Brown. The Post, the standard-bearer for local journalism, has yet to grant any substantial amount of print to Republican and Statehood Green Party candidates, much less have they even considered expanding their "Faces in the Race" to include other Democratic hopefuls.

Consequently, candidates like David Kranich, a Republican; Chris Otten, a Statehood Green; and Nestor Djonkam and Artee Milligan, both Democrats; toil in almost absolute obscurity. Though they all gathered the necessary signatures to officially appear on the September ballots, their campaigns remain invisible to all but the most in-the-know political observers. Of course, the fact that they are all such "minor" candidates with less money than the big five provides cover for the media blackout -- if they had any support, we'd cover them, or so goes the justification. Of course, just the opposite could be true -- if you'd cover them, they might get support.

This isn't to say that the Posties and other MSMers are conspiring to shut alternative candidates out of the mayoral contest altogether. After all -- to pick on the Post again -- there aren't that many of them out there to cover the myriad of stories come there way. Additionally, the September 12 election is merely a primary, so there is plenty of time afterwards to cover the candidates from the other parties that will face the chosen Democrat in November.

But we're not terribly optimistic. Granted, this is a Democratic town. But even within the Democrats there are nuances that the media could do better exploring and exposing. Many Democrats may well lean far enough to the right to be Republicans or far enough to the left to be Statehood Greens, so why not give those candidates the air time to see if they really fly? Honestly, the whole electoral process might become significantly more engaging if voters weren't convinced that the best choice they had was between one Democrat and another.