The article Oct. 22 by Tim Sheehan and E. J. Schultz regarding negative political campaigning was appreciated. It highlights these larger questions:
Would we, as voters, vote for a candidate who ran a clean and honest campaign? Someone who gave straight answers to any question. (Or even said they didn't know the answer right now). Someone who refused to talk about how bad the other candidate is -- and instead pledged (in writing) what he or she would do if elected? Would we be wise enough to vote for someone who refused contributions and favors from special interests?
How can we, as voters, expect a dishonest campaign to transform a candidate into a truthful, forthright and saintly elected official overnight? Are we that naive?
The sandbox of negative politics and half-truths is not a place to expect our leaders of tomorrow to scamper out of without a fair amount of dirt staining them.
We need to use our vote to elect more leaders who have a higher standard. Just because we live in a haze doesn't mean we forgot what fresh air smells like.