The Great Presidential Triathlon: Why presidential candidates campaign too long

In the past few election cycles, what was once known as the Presidential Race has evolved into a strange and malicious creature that could only be described as the Presidential Triathlon. It is not enough for our TV networks and radio stations to be swamped with a cascade of attack ads in the months leading up to voting day itself; nowadays, we as Americans are all but forced by the mass media and our angry friends and relatives to care about the election more than a full year before hand. My family’s dinner discussions have instilled my seven-year-old sister with a feeling of absolute terror when she considers the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency, and it has become impossible to search for news on the web without having his tactical comb-over fill the computer screen.

Radicals and frontrunner hopefuls alike are forced to endure the nation’s close scrutiny, ridicule and attention for a much longer time than they are used to. Candidates have been slowly and steadily beginning their campaigns earlier and earlier over the past half-century, starting with Kennedy, who announced his candidacy 311 days before the election. This number has gotten larger every election cycle: Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy a full year before the election in 1979, and in 2015, Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy 576 days before the election. This longer election season is surely tiring and difficult for politicians and their constituents alike, and whether it is a necessarily positive development is debateable.

A positive outcome is the exposure that is given to candidates who wouldn’t be as known if not for the news coverage, such as Bernie Sanders and Ben Carson. Because of the expanded attention span of the media, and therefore of the American public, candidates who wouldn’t normally have a shot are now given a chance at the spotlight. There is more time to campaign, more time to fundraise, and more time to reach out to the electorate. People get to be more involved and more in touch with politics because of this.

On the downside, this also entices candidates to say and do crazier things in a grotesque battle for media coverage, as the public fixates most of their attention on the outrageous. While there are many intricate differences in the American public, one thing we all have in common is that we like to get mad; specifically, we like to get mad together. The longer election cycles, and really the longer primary cycle, prompts campaign hopefuls to say and do crazier things in order to stand out and to rile up the public. No matter whether it is positive or negative, more attention is more attention.

This leads to an increased polarization of American politics. Politicians become far too busy getting angry at each other that they forget how to compromise in order to move the country forward. The whole affair seems to be slowly becoming more like a bizarre sports event rather than a serious democratic process, which frankly disgusts me.

So let me know who is still standing on the top of the polls in 2016, because then I will have the patience and the motivation to care. For now, I’m more than content to shut out the noise and focus on matters that have much more importance to me, such as reading comics, instead of being constantly terrified by the ghastly nightmare that the election system has become.

– By Cameron Underwood