In the wake of the debate between democratic candidates for the US Presidency, the storyline that has dominated many news feeds has been a logistics flub that left Former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton off the stage after a commercial break. This storyline is obscuring what should be the outrage of the night: the nearly complete lack of discussion about global development.

To review, the three candidates for the Democratic nomination for the US Presidency in 2016 gathered in New Hampshire for a heavily policy focused debate.

The debate covered a range of topics from the DNC data breach, Republican front runner Donald Trump, political donations to each campaigns, gun control and of course national security. Taking the same lens my colleague Joe McCarthy used to assess the most recent Republican debate, let’s take a look at what the three democratic candidates discussed. For the record, the three remaining candidates on the democratic side are Senator Bernie Sanders, Former Governor Martin O’Malley and Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The term ISIS was said 61 times during the debate. Though terrorism was only said 20 times. To get a sense of how this stacks up against the republicans, here are the results of the last two debates side by side:

This graph for the Democrats looks a whole lot different than the Republican counterpart, but notably poverty is still almost completely absent. Democrats said the term poverty twice, and the terms aid or international development once each. This gives the Democrats a 4 to 0 lead in terms of talking about developing and improving the world, but that score is pretty sad for both sides.

Both the Democrats and Republicans love to talk about ISIS right now. They love to talk about the military (10 times for Democrats, 25 times for Republicans) and both Party’s candidates discussed war and refugees. Yet somehow, the term poverty basically never comes up. Nor does the concept of aid and development.

How is this possible? The world has over 700 million people living in extreme poverty. The United States is one of the leading donors of international development aid. And aid and ending poverty is absolutely crucial to ending war and terrorism. Yet it is still effectively unmentioned by the Democrats and the Republicans.

My colleague Tom Murphy wrote that if US voters want to know how the candidates feel about the issue of poverty then they must “ask them.” I agree, but it must be more than this.

Candidates for the US Presidency must not wait to have the public ask them about this issue, they must start acknowledging that ending poverty is a crucial step towards making the world a safer and more just place. If candidates are going to mention ISIS over 60 times in both debates, then they have to talk about the depressed economies ISIS has taken advantage of in establishing their hegemony in territory that used to belong to Syria and Iraq.

Not proactively addressing poverty will leave the world’s most vulnerable open to attack, domination and radicalization. To secure the bold future that each US Presidential candidate is promising they must address ending extreme poverty.

A good starting point for a plan is the Global Goals. Make your New Year’s resolution calling on US voters to press for the Global Goals and the end of extreme poverty in TAKE ACTION NOW.

Data for the charts was taken from this transcript of the Democratic debate.