How should you judge a candidate?
I happened upon a League of Women voters web page that has a guide to judging any politician.
http://lwv.org/content/how-judge-candidate
One excerpt made me smile because it states the most familiar tactics some candidates use ALL THE TIME!
Common distortion techniques:
•Name calling/Appeals to prejudice: These are attacks on an opponent based on characteristics that will not affect performance in office. Accusations such as, “My opponent is arrogant and full of hot air,” do not give any real information about the candidate. Reference to race, ethnicity or marital status can be subtly used to instill prejudice.
•Rumor mongering: These include statements such as, “Everyone says my opponent is a crook, but I have no personal knowledge of any wrongdoing,” which imply (but do not state) that the opponent is guilty.
•Guilt by associations: These are statements such as, “We all know Candidate B is backed by big money interest,” that attack candidates because of their supporters rather than because of their stands on the issues.
•Catchwords: These are phrases such as “Law and Order” or “un-American” designed to trigger a knee-jerk emotional reaction rather than to inform.
•Passing the blame: These are instances in which a candidate denies responsibility for an action or blames an opponent for things over which they had no control.
•Promising the sky: These are unrealistic promises that no elected official could fulfill.
•Evading real issues: These include instances in which candidates may avoid answering direct questions, offer only vague solutions, or talk about the benefits of proposed programs but never get specific about possible problems or costs.
Take a look at the guide at their site. I think most of us do much of their suggestions, albeit probably not on paper, but it could be helpful for anyone who is undecided.