The US has an absurdly long campaign cycle, so much so that politicians are always campaigning...and never legislating. So many other democracies have legally mandated campaign periods: "In Mexico, a 2007 law limited the length of campaigns. In Argentina, advertisements can begin only 60 days before the election, and the official campaign itself can start only 25 days after that. In France, the presidential campaign is generally only two-weeks long." This would help limit the amount of big money in politics. The money flowing from big donors (which is difficult for small donors to sustain) is substantial, especially over the practically 2 year period for federal elections. It also limits the amount of money spent in advertising which in turn limits the amount of exposure (read: exhaustion) Americans feel when it comes to these important elections. -- Some might argue that these long campaign seasons increase voter turnout. I think that there are a variety of reasons turnout increases or decreases. In this case, bombardment of political advertising (and campaigning) over long periods of time exhausts the voter and turns them off to politics. (side note: there is a balance to voter turnout. You want enough so that the elected officials are accountable to the voters, but you don't want so much that those officials can't act. And too much voter turnout could be indicative of a problem - people only turnout when they care, when they're passionate, when there's a problem) quote source: https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/21/450238156/canadas-11-week-campaign-reminds-us-that-american-elections-are-much-longer

**TL;DR If legislators expect to keep the promises of their campaigns, they should dedicate less time to campaigning** U.S. presidential elections are held every 4 years, which is a significant enough period in which to govern successfully. Or so one might think. The excessively long American campaign cycle inhibits presidents from being able to legislate effectively, the same being even truer for members of Congress. For presidents and members of congress, there are a number of factors influencing their ability to reform government, all to do with the lengthy campaign cycle... • It is sometimes said that the race for the presidency begins the _day after_ the election, i.e. the 2020 election results were confirmed on Saturday 7th November, meaning the 2024 presidential campaign began on Sunday 8th November. This means that presidents are constantly watching out for opponents rather than advocating meaningful policy, even when they are in their second term. • Congressmen and women in the House of Representatives are elected every two years, meaning there is no real time to enact lasting legislation without a considerable majority • The lack of regulation on campaign finance laws makes members of Congress beholden to their campaign donors, meaning that they cannot afford to lose the support of wealthy organisations for fear of losing their seats. Considering how long candidates must campaign for, this money is an essential factor in their success

**I don’t know if the length of campaign season in the United States is democratic or extreme.** • This opens a really interesting debate about how democracy works and whether or not it is wrong or necessary to have such a long period for campaigning. To take the example of the 2016 US presidential election, the campaign period was [597 days old]( https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/us-election-longest-world/501680/) by Election Day in November. This is particularly long in comparison to [Britain where the cycle lasts 139 days or France where the candidates are only supposed to spend 2 weeks campaigning]( https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/us-election-longest-world/501680/). • _Arguments for_ - making campaign season shorter in the US, would help encourage more American people to engage in the voting process and focus more on policy as opposed to popularity. Long campaigning periods historically affect the attitudes and motivations of voters and encourage divisiveness and rivalry between candidates. Debates often become opportunities for personal attacks and dissuade the American people from wanting to participate. Fundraising is also extremely excessive due to the amount of time needed to sustain staff and advertising etc. • _Arguments against_ - on the other hand, there is an argument that long presidential campaigns are part of America’s character and part of the country’s democratic process. Comprised of [primaries, conventions, rallies, and debates]( https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-a-long-presidential-race-is-good-for-democracy/2012/10/05/520a1f16-0d6e-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_story.html), they are all important parts of deciding who to vote for. Each of these gives voters another opportunity to see the kind of person they’re voting for and ultimately decide if they want to elect them as the next leader of the free world. Having a long campaign season allows candidates multiple occasions to attract new voters and considering the size and scale of the United States, it isn’t really any surprise it takes so long.