In America, of course, Presidential elections are held every four years. About eighteen months before the election, candidates start announcing that they are going to run. At that point, the vindictive of the populace tends to shift from the current President (unless, of course, s/he is running for re-election, in which case it only intensifies) to the field of candidates who are emerging. The focus of that diatribe narrows as candidates drop from the primary races until only two are left, at which point things begin to heat up in earnest. Finally, the elections are held, and the hatred increases while the demagoguery continues primarily on the losing side and the nation settles into its comfortable pattern of well focused hatred for two and one half years until the cycle begins anew.
There is a slim chance that if this process accomplished anything it would be justifiable, but in fact it accomplished nothing and only intensifies over time. The reason it continues is that we are a very angry people, and this is a way to express (and thereby increase) our rage in a socially acceptable mileiu. It also panders to the less educated and less intelligent members of our society who cannot engage in well-mannered debate, and the result is that many of those people now occupy public office and seek to gut public education. Another result is that we elect bullies who are far too eager to go to war. The whole process is incredibly destructive and simply must change before it is irreversible. The right prattles on about the downfall of societies having historically been a change in sexual ethics. That is to confuse correlation with causation. The downfall of societies is almost always runaway anger followed by runaway spending on war. Sound familiar?