The New Republic lead article this week "Conscientious Objector: Why I Can't Vote for Bush" is by Robert A. George, an editorial writer for the New York Post and former Republican staffer for Newt Gingrich. It's interesting to read why a guy with clean Republican conservative credentials will not vote for Bush.

For me one of the most interesting parts that Robert George wrote was this:
"...It is a good thing Bush has an idealistic streak that informs his vision of the world. That idealism leads him to a belief that 'freedom is not America's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world.' But, without demanding accountability from his administration, that messianic zeal is being corrupted, and his policies are lurching out of control. Without a defined, limited overall vision of the war on terrorism and a corresponding commitment to government accountability, Bush can hardly claim to be the champion of 'conservative values.'
...[Bush] has asserted that we are in an actual war that must be fought with the full wartime powers of the presidency. With vague congressional approval, this assertion grants the president--and, more importantly, the presidency--powers deeply disturbing from a civil liberties perspective. Indeed, this expansion of presidential prerogative is anathema to the conservative belief in limited government. 

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041025&s=george102504

I truly believe that if Kerry squeaks by and wins, it's because a lot of libertarian-leaning, conservative Republicans were not motivated by George Bush and stayed home. On the other hand, I think it's fear of "more of the same" George Bush---not Kerry charisma certainly---that seems to keep the Democrats motivated and together this year.