I think Gore was a strong candidate. I think he lost not because he wasn't qualified but simply because he had a rather dry personality so the voters who choose based on personality rather than qualifications couldn't "warm up" to him. I think in other elections, it wasn't so much that one candidate was better than the current ones so much as that one was clearly better than the other. In this one, the trouble I'm having is that they each are about half of what I want in a president, and the other half of their views that I disagree with or think are weaknesses on their part are not minor issues. In the past, when I've disagreed with my favored candidate on issues, they've been minor issues for me, ones that I could easily trade off for the major ones I did agree with them on.
Of course, the non-Americans have different priorities than Americans too. I can understand why non-Americans are going to favor Obama, because his positions on the war in Iraq, which is the one major international issue, are more consistent with international opinion. Non-Americans are not going to be as concerned with domestic policy...for that matter, the worse off the US economy is, the better it is for them. They both have major flaws in other areas...just they both fall on opposite sides of reality. For example, in terms of the economy, one is hopelessly idealistic about solutions that lack substance, while the other is completely clueless. Neither is within the realm of reality. But, maybe that's because people expect the president to fix these things that really should not be within the purview of government anyway...at least not unless we end up in another full-out depression and need a Teddy Roosevelt style rescue.