As of last week, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are locked in as the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, respectively. Each has also found their running mate. Some voters may still be undecided, and some may even be considering voting for this election's Libertarian candidate, former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, who is actually pretty lucid for a Libertarian.

Libertarians are the party of (extremely) limited government, and much of their platform derives from the ideal that citizens should be free to do whatever we want, as long as we don't hurt others. They want an American government that doesn't spy on its people, that respects personal property and stays out of other countries' affairs. Their stance on recreational drug use would (and does) appeal to many a college undergrad. Reading through the party platform, their vision of America sounds like an egalitarian paradise where everyone lives and lets live.

The problem comes when you take a more critical look. For one thing, I don't believe government is always the solution, but Libertarians put entirely too much faith in the free market when it comes to education, energy policy, healthcare and a variety of other issues. Libertarians argue that public school systems should be abolished because the free market can provide a higher quality and more efficient education. That's all well and good, but what about those families that can't afford this kind of education? What's to stop providers from placing profits and test scores over a well-rounded education? In regards to the environment, the platform says that "governments are unaccountable for damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection." That may be true, but the free market is no guarantee of accountability. After all, environmental regulations only exist because of big businesses' track record. On the other hand, they do acknowledge the individual's responsibility for making environmentally conscious choices.

Rather than reform Social Security, Libertarians would eliminate the system altogether, leaving needy people to rely on the kindness of charitable organizations and friends or family. They believe the elimination of welfare programs will encourage Americans to be more charitable and civil, which is a nice ideal, but a little naïve. Charities don't have unlimited funds and neither do most people's friends or family. Generous strangers may help, but GoFundMe is not free of the abuse that some claim is widespread in the Social Security system.

Clearly, the Libertarian Party has a lot more faith in humanity than I do, but that hasn't won them any national elections. If you believe this is the party of real change and you'll be doing more than taking a vote from Democrats and Republicans, more power to you.