Lots of you felt it wasn't negative at all. Paul Waldman agrees:

While lots of people complain about how dirty and nasty today's campaigns are, candidates today might as well be firing cannons filled with nerf balls compared to what used to go on. Andrew Jackson's opponents distributed pamphlets accusing him of being "a gambler, a cock fighter, a slave trader and the husband of a really fat wife." Now that's some negative campaigning! Or how about Karl Rove spreading rumors that his client's opponent was a pedophile? Ah, the good old days. [...]

I suppose the problem at the moment for Clinton is that the story she's been telling about Obama all along - that he doesn't match her on experience, toughness, and policy chops -- doesn't seem to be doing the trick. But if she's going to set aside that argument, it has to be replaced with something. This is just one ad, of course. But it's hard to discern exactly why Clinton thinks voters should reject Obama and choose her instead.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.