Both candidates have great campaigns behind them. Right now, we are at the subtle phase of a presidential campaign. Bush is out there, with ads, asserting that Kerry is a tax-and-spend Democrat and a bad leader in this era of terrorism, while Kerry holds off on ads and lets the 9/11 commission instill subtle doubts on Bush by itself.
Who's got the winning strategy? Hard to say. On the one hand, Bush is embarking on a campaign meant to discredit his opponent by wrapping him in the same clothes Democrats wore through the eighties. It is an effective one, though not as effective as it was back then, because for whatever reason that perception of Democrats is a scary one for many.
On the other hand, if we are to believe that reelection campaigns are simply a referendum on the incumbent, then Kerry has the winning strategy. By letting the 9/11 commission and Bush himself embarrass his most imp. cause (and, if you are paying attention to polls, the commission is beginning to have an impact), swing voters begin to develop certain doubts that will dictate how they vote in November. Also, if this election will be less about swing voters and more about turnout, then Kerry might hold the advantage here as well. As revelations about faulty and forged intelligence come out, the base of the party continues to simmer and that usually translates into more votes on election day. Think 1998, when Clinton's scandals were thought to be leading to a Republican sweep of those elections; It didn't happen. Why? Because the base of the party became outraged by the pseudo-witchhunt of Clinton's personal affairs.
The same could be said of Bush, who will attempt to increase his turnout with issues like gay marriage and abortion.
At this point, the race is, in Matthew Dowd's view, at equilibrium. This could be good or bad for his candidate: For one, Kerry hasn't been airing ads as furiously as has the Bush team. Second, and more importantly, is the fact that views on challeging candidates are fluid this early in the race. So, Kerry will have an opportunity to win back some of those who have an unfavorable opinion of him now.
I don't know who's running the better campaign. One side says the Bush team is running like we're in the middle of the eighties, and that Kerry is running a brilliant marathon campaign- like the one that overtook Dean, while another side says the Bush campaign is no Dean campaign.
Something to Consider: Remember, when Dean was on top and his opponents kept saying he was reckless and a danger to the party, at the time most of us felt he wasn't being hurt. But those instilled perceptions of him prevailed eventually- with his prodding.