Especially, please don't use flags to try to delete answers that are wrong answers. Downvote those (and consider helping to improve them). Use flags for things that don't even answer the question, or that are spam or abusive.
Close votes are for questions that should be closed, not questions you'd just rather not see. Close reasons include "too broad" and "primarily opinion-based", which have overlap with "don't like" for many folks, but be clear about what you're doing. I've continued past more than a few questions to which my reaction was along the lines of "meh, that's pretty sketchy, but it's competently-asked and not close-worthy".
I disagree, in a nuanced way, with what this answer says about downvotes. Guidance that says "downvote when X" does not logically imply "don't downvote when not X"; there's no "only" there. So yes, do downvote when a post is sloppy or very wrong -- but I think it's also ok to downvote something that passes that test yet is distasteful in some other way. Look, we've had questions that are on-topic but objectionable to some, for example questions about brutally killing or torturing people. The ones I recall were deemed on-topic, but that doesn't oblige me to want to encourage them. Similarly, a question might be fine but it attracts an answer that suggests something I consider repulsive -- I'd downvote that. (I can't think of an example off-hand. I don't actually downvote a lot here.)
But that's a special brand of "don't like". We shouldn't downvote a sound, well-argued answer just because we don't like it. (Fake examples: ew, I prefer my zombies to be fast not slow, or I don't like questions that assume FTL, or time-travel is inherently broken so why are you even asking that?) Let's remember that we're a large, diverse community with different tastes. Don't downvote just based on taste, but do downvote based on quality, and I don't see anything wrong with downvoting for strong repulsion.