Neither is likely to happen, sadly.

X because of their supporters".

It's a sad state of affairs, but that's the reality of our political system.

So you're not going to get everyone to agree on everything, even on what an election should be about. Should or should not is about morality, and that's about as subjective a topic as you can get. All of the things you mentioned will be taken into account to one degree or another, including personalities, because everyone has their own personality that they bring to the voting booth.

Presidents are often faced with issues or events that were not considered in the primary or general campaign. They have to use their judgement and character to deal with these issues.

And I think Democrats are blessed with 4 candidates, so far, who are light-years ahead of any republican candidate in terms of character.

Elections should not be about polls or the amount of money corporations pay to campaign funds to influence elections and policy; it should not be about the connections a candidate has at the top, but about the connections the candidate has with the 99%, and how that candidate serves that 99%.

Elections SHOULD be about issues, and selecting the candidates who have the best positions and strongest record on those issues.

That's not how the electorate votes. And nothing you can do or say can change that.

Lets look back to Kennedy. By many accounts Nixon won the debates on the radio, but Kennedy cleaned the floor on TV.
Kennedy was the young, charismatic candidate, Nixon wasn't.
Let's fast forward to Reagan - Carter, and 4 years later with Reagan - Mondale. There is no denying that Reagan was the most "likable" to the electorate. He was homey, and down to earth. The one you "wanted to have a beer with".

Bush - Dukakis, a little closer in personalities.
Bush - Clinton...........no contest, Bill Clinton is the most personable, wonderful politician of a life time.

Clinton - Dole, again need I say more??

Bush - Gore - Bush seemed to like everyone, Gore was stiff and somewhat standoffish.
Bush - Kerry - Elite North Easterner with a yacht, and a socialite wife?

Then we come to Obama. He was inspirational, he was young, minority, "new", and very very exciting. What exactly did McCain have on him? An old fuddy duddy white guy. No contest
And then again Obama - Romney. Rich white guy with a Ken Doll like appearance.

All of those have one thing in common. I hate to say this because its so rhetorical, but each winner is the one you want to "have a beer with". He is the one that you want to see in your living room every night. He was the one that most Americans could identify themselves with the most.

What happens if it is Hillary Clinton vs Marco Rubio or Scott Walker? I think she should be hoping and praying that her competitor is Jeb Bush. At least then she has the dynasty argument muted.
I don't see Hillary connecting with the common voter as much as those two men could. I don't think that issues are EVER the deciding factor in the election. It's always the personality. Can Hillary win???? I don't know, but I have my doubts.

Honesty is a personality trait IMO. Jeb or Trump or whoever else may end up saying "all the right things" on every issue you care about (not likely but assume they build their general election campaign by polling progressives knowing they'll get the R vote and trying to turn some Ds). Would you trust that they will actually do what they say on the issues?

Without honesty, the issues don't matter. And not just honesty with voters. Congress needs to trust the president if legislation on difficult issues is going to get done. Foreign leaders need to trust the president if treaties are going to get done. Citizens aren't going to back the president (e.g. call congress) if they're suspecting an ulterior motive on the issues.

We expect politicians to lie during campaigns (for good reason). Voters aren't going to turn out simply for issue statements. They are going to turn out when they like the candidate's stand on issues AND trust that the candidate will do what they say after the election.

But things other than just the issues also matter. For me one of those things is electability in a general. Because without that, there's no there there.

If I think a person is dishonest, power hungry or will turn their principles at the drop of a hat...

Why would it matter what they say in their speeches? It's all a lie and could change with the very next focus group...