Yes, there may have been a a fair amount of acrimony. It is, after all, a contest.

On June 7, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders concluded what had become, by the end, a contentious Democratic presidential primary. As the race wore on, the candidates grew more aggressive in speeches, in debates, and on Twitter. Sanders in particular criticized Clinton’s hawkishness and sympathy toward Wall Street, attacks amplified by the media.

But when it comes to campaign ads, something happened that was pretty amazing.

But this animosity was entirely absent from one important realm. According to Kantar Media, Clinton and Sanders aired 206,528 spots between them this year—and not one was deemed “negative” by the analysts in Kantar’s Campaign Media Analysis Group (CMAG).

It wasn’t that way on the Republican side. Attack ads were the rule, with Jeb! and TrusTed and Trump and Little … Rubio and several more taking part in the exchange of gunfire. More than $62 million of attack ads were directed against Trump alone. And in case you were thinking Democrats always played this nice?

The absence of negative ads is a marked shift from 2008, when Obama spent $58 million on primary ads, while Clinton spent $33 million. Although CMAG didn’t measure sentiment that year, both candidates aired negative spots.

That included Hillary’s infamous “3 AM” ad.

While this news is satisfying for members of the grown-up party, over on the Republican side, they’re rubbing their hands. If only Hillary will stick with unilateral disarmament through the fall, they’ll be free to batter her without concern for return fire! They shouldn’t count on it.