To: Rich1 who wrote (5302 ) 11/10/2002 6:43:59 PM From: Rich1 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 206963 FLYING COLORS A Bush Dynasty Begins to Look Real (Page 2 of 2) THEY were talents different from his father's. The younger Mr. Bush is much more of a Texan than his father, and less of a student, both in college and later. He is more comfortable in crowds and with small talk, and less at ease with reporters. Where his father was respected, the son is likable. Even the liberal Texas writer Molly Ivins, who last week called President Bush "shallow, spoiled and of mediocre intelligence," said, "I really think you would have to work at it to dislike him." Friends call him relaxed and unpretentious, a style that comes across on the stump or when he works a rope line — and one that paid off in his last-minute campaigning for last week's election. Advertisement Look out Big Foot, this binocular takes pictures! If your eyes have changed... shouldn’t your light? If you are still sleeping on old spring mattress technology, try Verflex® with an in-home trial Get a zero impact workout while flying through the air It’s time to put all of your photos onto your computer Bring this incredibly portable digital camera everywhere! Don’t let your guests sleep on this bed-they may not leave! Natural de-icer means you’ll have to shovel less this winter Robert M. Teeter, a Republican pollster who worked for the elder Mr. Bush in his 1980, 1988 and 1992 campaigns, said "I don't think the country perceives this as a dynasty," because of the personality differences. "It perceives them as separate entities," related, of course, but not "a political unit" as the Kennedys seemed to be in the early 60's. That distinction in the Bushes' political personalities may help account for the short interval between their presidencies. Sixty-three percent of voters opposed President Bush's father when he was defeated in 1992, but his son managed to win election after a gap of only eight years, not the 20 it took voters to forget the elder President Adams. President Bush showed this fall how his strategic political instincts differ from his father's. In the 1980 primaries, the elder Bush was cautious. After upsetting Ronald Reagan in Iowa, he wasted five weeks with blandness, doing little to give Republicans reasons to like him. Instead he relied on momentum, "the Big Mo," and lost badly in New Hampshire. The younger Bush, on the other hand, disregarded warnings that he was risking his popularity by campaigning intensely for candidates who might lose in last week's election. He was right; as Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, said last week: "You can't sit on your popularity — it just atrophies. But you can reinvest it and make it grow." He has also been lucky, in being underestimated in the 1994 and 2000 campaigns, and in how the Florida results were decided in 2000. But all long-lasting politicians have luck; President Bush's father, for example, had the good fortune to have Michael S. Dukakis for an opponent in 1988. And as another baseball executive, Branch Rickey of the Brooklyn Dodgers, once said, "Luck is the residue of design." Two years into a presidential term is too early to judge its success: Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan would have been judged failures at that stage. Moreover, Senate Democrats or Republican overreaching could easily thwart the objective of recording domestic achievements by 2004, and no one knows the political impact of a potential war with Iraq. But Mr. Bush probably has his eyes open to those risks. After all, no family that lived through the 1992 election knows better than his how quickly the public mood can shift. And he has, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said of one President Roosevelt (historians now believe he was referring to Theodore, not Franklin), "a first-class temperament" for the job. <<