I wouldn't read too much into this. There's the Dems' idea of "personal," and there's everyone else's idea. To the Dems, criticizing what BroomHillary has done and not done is personal, because it singles her out and might make her feel bad. To normal people, "personal" would mean making fun of her cankles and her screechy voice. There are plenty of comedians and PACs to do that.
Ted is not one to overlook a weakness in an opponent--something Trump's fiercest partisans complain about regularly.
It comes down to which candidate will do the best job of underwater demolition of the Sea Witch.
Which reminds me, Trump has a great "say-anything" approach, but one serious challenge he'd need to address is trying to argue principle when he's differentiating his views from Hillary's. The Beest's camp will definitely attack using the kaleidoscope of opinions he's held over the years.
They won't always do it directly. They'll set up pretend-conservative PACs with pretend-conservative names to criticize Trump from the right as a left-wing candidate who is just using conservatives to get elected. Ubama's campaign did this in both his elections.
Trump would need to learn to argue ideas coherently on the key issues in the face of state-run media interview questions. They will specifically try to catch him in contradictions or twist careless turns of phrase--which are his weakness--and contrast them with other things he's said. Their (only) goal is to repeat them enough so that conservatives will lose enthusiasm for him and stay home.