I just want to clarify the above post. I'm obviously stating that you need a certain ideology, presented in a certain way, to breed negativity. It can't just be personalities. But also most ideologies can be presented positively. Evangelical politics CAN be presented positively: it's just that they aren't in our society. Instead of evangelicals telling America what they were for in the early 80s, they told us what they were against. Instead of attacking gays and abortionists, Falwell/Robertson could have promoted feeding the hungry and building crisis pregnancy centers. The same can be said for what I like to call "radical centrism": the kind of populism charachterized by Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader. Instead of telling us what they were for: strong labor unions, small business, and the Constitution, they told us what they were against: immigration, big business, and the military industrial complex. This is not so much a difference in ideology, as a difference in approach, and that makes all the difference. Why is Ron Paul respected so much more than Pat Buchanan? They have basically the same positions. It's because Ron Paul has a so much more positive approach!