You may be tired of those negative political advertisements that run on your televisions, but don't look for a change soon. Those ads that so many people say they can't stand run for a reason: because they work.
National Public Radio says candidates will spend an estimated $4.4 billion on Television advertising, with attack ads being the most common during the 2016 campaign.
University of South Carolina political science professor Dr. Kirk Randazzo says people can't help but be drawn to these types of ads. It's the same reason why people are more likely to watch the news when something bad is happening, rather than when something good is happening.
"When a particular candidate is targeted by attack ads, that person's ranking in the polls decrease, and the likelihood that voters don't turn out to cast votes for that candidate increases, so the negative ads are very, very effective even though they turn people off and they don't like the message," Randazzo said.
A Wesleyan Media Project study was conducted on political advertising to show how negative political ads have become over the last four election cycles. Each election season has become increasingly negative leading up to this years election since 2000.
What the December 2015 study didn't show was all the negative attack ads that bombarded Iowa caucus voters in early 2016, or the attack on Republican candidates before South Carolina's primary.
Days before the New Hampshire primary, The New York Times described the Republican ads as "downright nasty".
With seven candidates from the two parties still in the race, the election season continues to remain exciting. Even when the parties nominate a single candidate, the attack ads will keep coming.