I really don't want get into the gray area of the hows and whys of the hostility I've seen, so let me walk that back and suppose, okay *qualitatively* they've been criticized about the same (I don't feel this, but for the sake of argument...). Under that metric then they both got "flamed" or neither did.
I think I must not be understanding this comment because it reads as though "criticize" means the same as "flame". That's not what you meant, is it?
Ann, I agree with your concern that attacks on character can easily cross the line into "Swift Boating" a candidate. But remember that character attacks have been a feature of this campaign from the beginning. All candidates have engaged in it. Remember too that the NY Times is pro- Democrat ( but I have no idea what on earth Maureen Dowd is .
) and that bias is often evident in its selection of news items.
Vicki raises a good point - we need to assess the integrity of the people we vote for, as well as their experience and their policies. Their character is a legitimate concern for voters. But sometimes campaigns cross the line into what's now become known as 'Swfit boating".
btw, what to make of Biden's reference to Franklin Roosevelt being President in 1929 and his television chats? Did he mean that as a joke?
The New Scientist has an interesting article on political spin in the sept 17 issue. Not sure any of the candidates would be too happy with it.
The chart alone is worth looking at.
New Scientist: Political Spin c.
