>> If we give credit and admiration to leaders when they do good, as is pretty common here, we should give them analogous considerations when they do bad.

Why do you think this dualism should exist?

There are certain qualities we admire and think make a good person.

There are other qualities that we detest and think make a bad person.

Should we really deem someone worse simply for the fact that he/she previously held admirable qualities? Shouldn't we just judge him based on the negative qualities, in of themselves?