It's funny how no one seems to think of the fact that considering the closeness of the election you cannot call one candidate horrible without calling the other at the very least pretty bad.
I think both were pretty weak and it was a matter of who was weakest.
Good point. I don't think either one was a horrible candidate, but they both had significant weaknesses. I think it turned out that Bush had some real strengths to balance out his weaknesses, while Kerry did not. He was simply the ABB candidate, and that wasn't enough. He offered nothing positive, and therefore most attracted the votes of people who simply didn't like Bush.