I had an email discussion over the weekend with someone over the proper strategy needed for Kerry to beat Bush this year. We aren't the only ones out there that are annoyed that he has not seemed to have done a good job of it.
My philosophy is that you have to strongly show what is wrong with the other side, while putting forth a reason to vote for your ticket. I honestly am more worried about Bush than supportive of Kerry, though Kerry has enough going for him that I can equally honestly say that I don't have to hold my nose either to switch the little lever for him in November.
Andrew Tobias supplied a nice summary of why you should support Kerry/Edwards. It important to remember that people like to believe in something. I myself do not like to have to strongly dislike people. It is not good for you. Something good has to motivate me as well, or life is too depressing after awhile.
Certain people, especially Bush voters, somewhat snidely speak about the "Anyone But Bush" philosophy that is the dominating meme for the Democratic Party this year. This is stupid on various levels. First, the motivation behind ABB is that Bush is so bad; this really is nothing to be too cheery about. The snide brigade like to somehow imply that it's only personal (almost childishly so), which as I noted yesterday is somewhat true, but it's a lot more than that.
Second, voters often don't feel their choices are the best, but are able to determine one candidate is just not acceptable. The 2004 presidential election is sadly far from atypical. To combine the two, imagine if your choices were veal and some other food. You find veal offensive, since you care about those little cows etc., but don't find the alternative too yummy. But, it's not like the veal suddenly became acceptable, right? So you eat the non-veal, and generally, it isn't too bad in many ways anyhow. What's so complicated about that?
It's true that Kerry has various problems that annoys people, but the late great Clinton did too -- even the second time around, he didn't get a majority of the vote. Perot even received high single digits in 1996, numbers Nader would probably sell his soul to get (his acceptance of Republican and Reform Party support suggests he would be open to it).
Apparently, if the promising new WB show Jack and Bobby (Christine Lahti was great) is accurate, we won't get a truly ideal executive until the 2040s. For now, "politics is not therapy" as Eric Alterman says, but choosing the best candidate to promote your cause from those available.