Yes, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have talked about abortion, immigration, “the wall,” Vladimir Putin, gun control and dozens of other public policy issues and proposals. But each nominee quickly returned to his or her opponent’s values, integrity and character, eventually declaring the adversary “not qualified” to hold the nation’s highest office.

AD

AD

In a sense, both are merely following Obama’s lead.

As Jackie Calmes of the New York Times wrote on Aug. 30, 2012, some two months before that election: “Top advisers [to Obama] said they would seek to make the Republican candidates’ statements into a larger issue of character, one that they hoped would reinforce Mr. Romney’s image among many voters as a shape-shifting politician who has reversed position on abortion and gay rights, gun control and other issues — as his Republican rivals complained throughout their long nomination battle.”

Writing about a week later, Politico’s John Harris and Alexander Burns concluded that it was Obama who was generally responsible for the tone of the 2012 election, though “outside” conservative groups – not the Romney campaign – played a part, as well.

AD

AD

“With a few exceptions, Romney has maintained that Obama is a bad president who has turned to desperate tactics to try to save himself. But Romney has not made the case that Obama is a bad person, nor made a sustained critique of his morality a central feature of his campaign.

“Obama, who first sprang to national attention with an appeal to civility, has made these kind of attacks central to his strategy. The argument, by implication from Obama and directly from his surrogates, is not merely that Romney is the wrong choice for president but that there is something fundamentally wrong with him.”

And later in the same piece:

“It is not that the Obama-led attacks on Romney’s character have been especially vicious by historical standards. But they have been both relentless and remorseless, designed to portray Romney as too flawed personally to be a viable political alternative.”

AD

AD

Four years ago, Obama hammered Romney about his business dealings, wealth and changing issue positions, portraying him as a flip-flopper and liar. That, of course, is what Clinton is trying to do to Trump, who would seem to be a much easier target than Romney.

After all, Romney released his 2010 tax returns in January 2012 and his 2011 taxes eight months later. He didn’t create scams like Trump University, never mocked the disabled or demonized Mexicans, didn’t encourage violence at his campaign rallies, and talked about public policy in a serious way.

But unlike 2012, this year’s Republican nominee is also trying to discredit his opponent, portraying her as a criminal and a liar who has enriched herself in government service and destroyed the evidence of her misdeeds.

AD

AD

It is difficult to blame Clinton for the tenor of the current general election campaign. She showed an ability to talk about issues and events during her primary contest with Sen. Bernie Sanders. However, Trump’s changing positions on issues, his lack of knowledge, and his simplistic views of problems and solutions – all of which lead him to talk in platitudes and slogans – make it difficult for the two candidates to have a serious discussion about policy.

Moreover, Trump has been so misleading about so many things, from Trump University and his charitable contributions to his business dealings. He has been so vulgar and disparaging that he has virtually forced Clinton to make the election about his character.

Both Trump and Clinton have so much personal baggage that it was always inevitable that, if they were the two parties’ nominees, the race would largely be about character and integrity. But it is still distressing that the campaigns have not wrestled nearly enough with the nation’s problems, challenges, and possible solutions in anything approaching a meaningful way.

Don’t hold your breath for that to change.