Are there positive attacks?

The redundant phrase "negative attack" is getting more and more popular, despite (or because) its being more propagandistic than probative.

what are we going to do when the Republicans start in?

And it makes me ponder. I have to say, in my humble opinion, when you attack someone on their record of voting, or on the issues that make up a candidates platform, or on the people that advise that candidate, that is a positive attack.

If it is about hair, or how someone looks, or what they did or did not do in kindergarten, then I feel that is simply mudslinging.

I have noticed a lot of people here who will post a list of votes, tell you your candidate voted against all of them, and then expect you to answer for that, or show proof otherwise. I also think this tactic is a 'negative attack' because most of the time they have not really done the research, and they are just repeating some nonsense that someone else posted.

Also, an attack about someones personal life, an affair, drugs as a teenager, that is alone negative.