i think that when you try to rationalize the irrational, you become confused (not you personally, just a general statement).
when trying to break down why people voted for whoever, it's not as complex as we try to make it out to be. as someone pointed out earlier, it's pretty much a popularity contest. one magazine, don't remember the one off the top of my head, did a poll of which candidate would you like to have a beer with, and bush won 51 to 49%... and interestingly enough, the actual election broke down the same way...
in any event, i think if you were to actually explore the psychiatric and psychological profile of each person, you'd find something.
many psychiatrists feel that clinton had a bit of a narcissistic personality disorder (egotistical/feeling of grandisoity at most , if not all times, and the inability to not keep one's self first even when it presents problems with personal relationships, work, etc.; impulsive behavior...
http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html ).
i haven't talked with psychiatrists about bush, though i probably will begin to come monday, but i would think that he shows a bit of borderline personality- people are either all good or all bad... countries that stand with us are good, and those that don't aren't... you're a person/country who wants democracy, or you're a terrorist (maybe not that extreme, but hopefully you get a picture).
i'm not sure whether or not that's the direction in which you are trying to go or not (there were/are too many linked articles to read!).