I think Gladiator could of made a better point.. and that is if you asked a random sample of people to write down who they would vote for and 1 reason why, you would find that the majority of people voting McCain would give a reason that was anti-Obama, whilst the majority of Obama supporters would write pro-Obama reasons.
It is an interesting view to look into, the voting someone because you hate them less... a election of hate, though in a lot of honesty I think that was the 2004 election, and would of been this election if Clinton had got the nod. What this would probably point to, and I am sure there could be other questions included to support the idea, is that a majority of republicians don't like their candidate (despite him being voted in democratically,) but would vote for him because he was preferable to Obama.
However, I would like to point out that I don't really think this view point is valid, though it may be better to look at those who currently support bush (only 30 odd % of americans, and less world wide) and see their answers, and you would probably find a higher % of people stating reasons of hate/dislike of Obama over pro-McCain.
That all said I would probably vote McCain (if I was eligible) though it would be a close thing in my mind. McCain tends to have the better overall process and experiance. And I think this is about experiance. Obama would be the best president the US has had if he waited just a little bit longer, if a Clinton/Obama ticket could of won then I think that would of been the best thing for Obama and he would of been the 1337 h4xz0r prez after... It may of even been ok if Hilary stood down after one term (dream-land I know,) as even 4 years in the VP slot might have been enough.
"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but i am Jesus"
"Nothing is worse than a fully prepared fool"