Election campaigns are meant to be contests of ideas, credibility and political vision. In reality, they are also endurance tests of organisation, timing and, increasingly, money. As a recent viral moment in Cyprus reminded us rather bluntly, the real question is no longer whether money matters in politics, but how openly we are prepared to acknowledge its decisive role.
Once upon a time, when political office carried unquestioned prestige and institutional authority, there were people who claimed that if they were made president for just one day, they would change everything. Rarely did those fantasies include the phrase “cash only”.
Today, amid rising costs, relentless media cycles, sophisticated technology and an unpredictable public mood, being “made” president is not just harder. It is also vastly more expensive.
In theory, pre-election periods are about programmes, ideas and trust. In practice, they are about time, money, stamina and management.
The recent viral video featuring former energy minister Giorgos Lakkotrypis, now speaking in an advisory capacity, laid bare an uncomfortable truth. Asked about campaign finances, he argued that one million euros is simply not enough for a presidential race and explained how such a ceiling can be bypassed through cash transactions.
For many viewers, the moment was jarring not because it revealed something new, but because it made visible the elephant in the room: the budget that can turn a candidate into a president.
By way of contradiction
In the United States, a presidential campaign is not a short political phase but a marathon that can last up to 22 months and span all 50 states. Consider the example of Barack Obama, who began his campaign in January 2007 for elections held in November 2008 against John McCain.
The process starts with a long exploratory period, often two years before election day, followed by primary elections from January of the election year. The first decisive turning point is Super Tuesday in early March. By May, the outcome is largely determined. During the summer, nominations are finalised, and after Labour Day the official campaign begins, lasting roughly seven months.
Within this framework, fundraising is not merely a necessity. It is a declaration of power, confidence and political momentum. A candidate’s ability to raise money signals credibility and public trust. Importantly, this money must come both from major donors and from grassroots contributions, often just a few dollars at a time. Small donations carry symbolic weight, demonstrating popular backing and convincing party structures that the candidate has genuine support.
Obama raised roughly $800 million in his first campaign, nearly double McCain’s $400 million. Hillary Clinton became the first candidate in US history to surpass the $1 billion mark, raising about $1.4 billion, without winning the presidency. When Joe Biden withdrew from the race, Kamala Harris raised $1 billion in just one month. Impressive, but again not enough.
Despite strict rules and public reporting, the US system is far from immune to circumvention. Every dollar is recorded and politically assessed by voters, yet money remains a powerful but imperfect predictor of victory.
This is Cyprus
In Cyprus, presidential elections are institutionally clearer and more constrained. The official campaign period begins six months before the first Sunday of voting. This is the only timeframe recognised by the electoral authorities. Regardless of intentions or informal mobilisation beforehand, spending only counts from the moment a candidate formally submits their nomination and pays the required €1,000 fee.
Anything spent before that moment does not qualify as campaign expenditure, even if political mobilisation has clearly been underway for months. This creates a paradox. While the legislator aims to limit both time and cost, the real issue is not how much is allowed, but how much a candidate can raise and how effectively it is managed.
Management, in fact, is everything. Technology and digital tools make costs measurable and, to an extent, predictable. With proper planning, digital advertising can be kept to around €50,000 over five months. Mistakes, however, can send cost-per-click soaring, pushing budgets beyond €200,000.
From October 2025, following legislative changes banning online political advertising, budgets will shift from platforms to production. Money will flow into content creation, ideas, videographers, editors and copywriters.
Outdoor campaigning also comes at a price. A single motorway billboard can cost around €1,500 per month, with printing adding another €1,000 per board. Ten locations over five months already amount to €85,000.
Party machinery matters enormously. Campaigns with organised party structures, volunteers and logistical support enjoy a major advantage. Venues are often provided free of charge, but fitting them out and operating them still costs money.
Campaigns are also, to a degree, performances. A single large event hosted in a hotel, complete with staging, screens, technical crews and production, can cost up to half a million euros.
All of this assumes a six-month campaign. In reality, Cyprus has already experienced much longer ones. When Averof Neofytou effectively launched his campaign in December 2021, some 15 months before the election, the race became one of the longest in Cypriot history. By contrast, Nikos Christodoulides announced his candidacy in May 2022. The result showed that longer does not necessarily mean better.
Cyprus holds elections in a fixed month for a reason. Extended campaigns rarely deliver proportional benefits. As Andreas Papandreou famously observed, the people’s August holidays are sacred, and campaigning during them is usually futile.
From fair game to shadow game
If fundraising in the US is a public demonstration of power, in Cyprus the legislator’s intention has been to create a fair game. The outcome, however, often resembles a shadow game. There are already complaints at European level about candidates allegedly using foreign websites and anonymous accounts to run advertisements. Such cases underline the need for updated procedures and more realistic safeguards.
Under these conditions, the issue is not simply the existence of a spending cap. Whatever the amount, procedures matter more. Experience suggests that with today’s costs, a €1 million ceiling for presidential campaigns is unrealistically low and should be doubled. For parliamentary elections, the current €25,000 limit should be at least quadrupled.
Campaigns start earlier for those who secure their candidacy in time. Those who do not often struggle to catch up. There are even rumours of individual parliamentary campaigns costing €700,000 on billboards alone.
The need for small donors, grassroots financing and full transparency in the management of every euro has now become a central political issue rather than a technical detail of electoral law.
Because in the end, the elephant in the room is not whether money shapes elections. It is whether the system is honest enough to admit it, regulate it and bring it fully into the light.