Someone misread the political manuals in campaign 2000, instructing candidates to avoid negativity at all costs. Without raining on anyone's parade, political dialogue demands finding fault or risking that you're politically neutered. Taking the 'high-road' risks taking no road at all by showing a candidate's lack of spine. Political consultants telegraphed the wrong signals about negative campaigning, suggesting that discrediting the opposition carries bad repercussions. All successful campaigns operate to impeach the credibility of political foes.
Voter apathy has nothing to do with perceptions of negative campaigning.
Respect for opponent's views doesn't mean pulling punches, equivocating and avoiding conflict at all costs. Reluctance for conflict is a sheer sign that candidates are running scared of responding to attacks. Without responding to attacks, voters have little basis to evaluate how candidates hold up under pressure. Like good boxing matches, political contests involve exchanging blows rather than dancing around the ring. Candidates can bob and weave, run and hide, for only so long before voters have them pegged as spineless, unprincipled and weak.