The American Conservative magazine, tied with Pat Buchanan, has an article from conservative writer Scott McConnell who endorses John Kerry. While admitting they will oppose a Kerry administration from day one, McConnell basically says Bush is unable to run the country. Here’s a quote from the article with the endorsement, titled “Kerry is the one”:

George W. Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism.

And another:

I’ve heard people who have known George W. Bush for decades and served prominently in his father’s administration say that he could not possibly have conceived of the doctrine of pre-emptive war by himself, that he was essentially taken for a ride by people with a pre-existing agenda to overturn Saddam Hussein. Bush’s public performances plainly show him to be a man who has never read or thought much about foreign policy. So the inevitable questions are: who makes the key foreign-policy decisions in the Bush presidency, who controls the information flow to the president, how are various options are presented?

The editors of the magazine include the piece while admitting they were split on the election. Among six other articles about the election, only one endorses Bush — as many as support Nader, Kerry or not voting at all. Buchanan endorses Bush in a well-written piece that suggests something Nader had claimed earlier this year: the corporate-backed major parties are vulnerable to a third-party charge. While he falls in line, you can see the beginnings of a viable alternative to Republican or Democrat.