"I think when Adams disagreed with Jefferson, he didn't make fun of the latter's hairdo. Nor did he use cheap shots such as dredging up his quaint habit of bedding his household slaves. Any attack was on the position, and not on the man holding it. "
Oh you are very wrong on this. Attack adds ar as old as democracy. And ad hominems the best of all.
Example
I am really enjoying the counterexamples. Have I mentioned I enjoy History a lot? Thanks for the vid. Question, though, admitting that ad hominem attacks have probably existed since the first election we ever held (for Chief Hunter of the tribe, perhaps?), were they the norm back in Jefferson's time? Or were the real issues discussed properly? Bear in mind that not everyone had the vote back then, so you really didn't need to worry about entertaining the masses with a really good and funny cut at an opponent. You had to worry more about convincing the real voters. Or am I romanticizing our past?
There's no real way of knowing obviously, but I find ad hominems to be too easy and effective not to be used widely. There was off course serious debate back then but that may not have been what reached the common voter.
But when you say the "common voter", was there really such a thing? If men without property and women were commonly barred, as were non-whites in general, was there a "common" vote to be catered to? From Wikipedia:
The United States Constitution did not originally define who was eligible to vote, allowing each state to determine who was eligible. In the early history of the U.S., most states allowed only white male adult property owners to vote.[1][2][3] Freed slaves could vote in four states.[4] Men without property and women were largely prohibited from voting. Women could vote in New Jersey (provided they could meet the property requirement) and in some local jurisdictions in other northern states. Non-white Americans could also vote in these jurisdictions, provided they could meet the property requirement. By 1856, white men were allowed to vote in all states regardless of property ownership, although requirements for paying tax remained in five states.
I would assume there would be plenty of small farmers with property for example.
Something that we're not allowed to talk about is voting standards. There really are good reasons to strictly limit who gets to vote, and IMO WAAAAY too many people are allowed to vote these days.
Why are people on welfare and/or those who don't work or pay taxes allowed to vote? Or govt. workers/contractors? Or people w/sub-90 IQ's? Or people under the age of 25 (who, these days, are more-or-less still children)? Or, shoot, even women (who generally are less inclined towards reason or serious politics than men are)? Why is the vote of someone who pays little-to-no taxes worth the same as someone who pays million$? Shit, Leftists don't even want people to have to provide proof of RESIDENCY/CITIZENSHIP anymore even!