Deep instinctual distrust of W

Recently, a Republican friend led me to seriously assess my thoughts and feelings about why I support Kerry, beyond my obvious partisan feelings and the belief that he'd be better for the high tech market, as Clinton was. As a result, I am beginning to see that for me, it's a matter of conscience and gut instinct. Here are my tacit and unarticulated reasons for supporting Kerry:

1. when I look at Kerry and Bush, I realize that I am measuring them against the yardstick of who I'd prefer to run a company - and Bush feels and looks the kind of CEO who can look good when you're hiring him, but will end up destroying a company - a spoiled lazy rich kid who delivers only excuses for his failures and refuses to take responsibility. Kerry - at least during the debates genuinely feels like a potential "great president", another Clinton in the making. How Presidential did Bush look before he was actually President? Check out his act at: http://www.videovotevigil.org/
2. Kerry is reality-based whereas Bush is faith-based, and this makes a big difference in fighting an effective war and building a healthy economy. I just read that Newsweek is about to break a report that Colin Powell has privately confided to friends in recent weeks that the Iraqi insurgents are winning the war. That the insurgents have succeeded in infiltrating Iraqi forces "from top to bottom, from decision making to the lower levels." But he doesn't say anything publicly for fear of embarrassing the President and costing him the election. I believe that if Bush is failing at the war, then his supporters are as equally blinded to reality as he is, and the need to elect new leadership is greater than ever.
3. the next president will appoint two Supreme Court justices with deep impact on my personal rights over the next 20 years, and the idea that Bush might appoint them sends a chill down my spine
4. I had a feeling this was true, but Gallup has confirmed my suspicion that Bush is the most polarizing President in history, even more than Clinton or Nixon: http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/login.aspx?ci=13735
5. I believe in environmental planning, and Bush's approach to clean air is to remove carbon dioxide from the list of pollutants and walk away from international treaties. With so many other important issues top of mind, the environment has shifted to the back of my mind. Anyway, with global warming now a certainty (http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/190557-3471-010.html), I believe that the long term health of the planet may depend of very important decisions made over the next ten years. Bush would make the wrong decisions.
6. I just now realized that I got a small glimpse into the strategic thinking capacity of the Kerry team, by looking at how they dealt with an advertising dilemma this summer. Both campaigns had an equal amount of money to spend in the race, but Democrats had to stretch it out for 13 weeks, the GOP over only 8. So Kerry went dark in August and conserved his resources for the final weeks of the campaign, as Bush went nuclear on Kerry after his convention. But in the final hours of the game, the Kerry campaign has had 50% money to saturate battleground states than Bush does, which, when combined with a bad news week for Bush, has led to his steady climb by 3 points during what should be a heavily entrenched war of the minds. This indicates to me more effective strategy and planning, which the Bush campaign seems sorely lacking.

What about you? Do you have a nagging doubt about either candidate that yearns to be vocalized?