[joesbucks]

Bush obviously. But why isn't their a choice for 2004 without being seen a traitor to the part if they indeed would/could be a better choice.

Let me repose the question. If the choice was Forbes for the republicans and Bush as a democrat (again with his record in tact...same votes, same comments, same actions) who would you vote for.

[Dane]

Bush obviously. But why isn't their a choice for 2004 without being seen a traitor to the part if they indeed would/could be a better choice.

You have plenty of choices. You could go the demo 9 route or the third party route.

Bush has eight years to fulffill his Presidency and in 2002 he defied 100 years of history in that a Republican administration gained seats in Congress during a mid-term election.

JMO, but I say stay with him and not muddy up the waters while the demo's are scrathing and salashing each others throat to get the demo nomination.

Let me repose the question. If the choice was Forbes for the republicans and Bush as a democrat (again with his record in tact...same votes, same comments, same actions) who would you vote for

Hypothetical. Forbe's is not going to join the race in 2004. Forbe's knows of the adage of when your "enemy is hanging himself, get out of the way". And contrary to your implication, Mr. Forbes's is a very welcome voice in the Republican party, IMO.

[carton253]

I would vote for the one who was strongest on the war on terror. Actually, I like Steve Forbes. If only I could get him to blink more.