Potomac Watch

Republicans can be strange. So desperate are they to beat Al Gore in 2000 that they want to hand their party's nomination to George W. Bush even before he proves he can beat other Republicans.

I know they crave order and hierarchy, but this is ridiculous.

That's the only sane response to the Bush-mania now sweeping through establishment and even conservative GOP ranks. A dozen governors endorsed the Texas executive even before he opened his fund-raising "exploratory" committee this week. Every day another GOP official all but begs him to run. And the pilgrimages to Austin have begun to resemble the Moslem hadj in their fervor.

"I've seen a lot of politicians in my day, and I have to tell you his instincts remind me of Reagan," says one right-wing hadji not known for flights of misplaced hope. "The refreshing thing about him is he's not afraid."

It's all impressive so far, but don't be fooled by this enthusiasm into thinking that the GOP contest is already over: George W. is going to have to fight for the prize, and he'll be a stronger challenger to Mr. Gore or Bill Bradley because of it.

Indeed, Mr. Bush's current strengths contain seeds of future vulnerability. As the son of a former president, he has name recognition and a huge fund-raising network. But the family tie also means he must distance himself from his father's political failures. Since Al Gore is sure to link the son to his father's recession and tax increase, the son might as well prove his independence to Republicans first.

Bush II is already doing this by assembling -- and leaking -- a list of policy advisers credible with the party's growth wing. The governor will tell you, even before you ask, that Dick Darman won't be part of his team (though some of us would like to see the governor wearing garlic to be sure). His two early economic coordinators, former Fed governor Larry Lindsey and Indiana businessman Al Hubbard, were part of the anti-Darman "underground" in his father's White House. Mr. Lindsey has ties to Steve Forbes and Mr. Hubbard worked for Dan Quayle.

New speechwriter Michael Gerson is a reporter (U.S. News) widely respected on the Christian right. It's also notable that his father's 1992 campaign team, especially pollster Bob Teeter, is being kept at arm's length.

Mr. Bush's other great strength is that he looks to many Republicans like a candidate who can win. After eight years of Clinton and three years of a Congress in retreat, they're almost as desperate for a champion as Democrats were in 1992. With his charisma, proven appeal to Hispanics, and his down-ballot coattails in a big state, Mr. Bush offers hope.

But if the ability to win is your main rationale, you can't afford to lose. Ronald Reagan, with his solid base, could stumble in Iowa in 1980 and recover. Can George W.? If his aura of inevitability vanishes, how will this first-time presidential candidate respond?

It's no accident that every GOP nominee since Goldwater in 1964 has either run at least once before, or been a sitting president. And if Mr. Bush does stumble, having other plausible candidates to fall back on wouldn't hurt Republicans.

Perhaps the greatest temptation for Mr. Bush will be to play it safe. He's from prudent bloodlines, after all, and many will advise him to stick to his Texas record rather than risk offering his own ideas for the future. But there is no better way to guarantee defeat.

In the primaries, he'd leave openings for Steve Forbes and Dan Quayle on Social Security and taxes. Lamar Alexander, trying to prove that dead candidates don't wear plaid, is going to knock him around on affirmative action. Without his own reform agenda, Mr. Bush would appear less like a fresh voice and more like his party's last two nominees.

Paradoxically, that would also hurt him against Mr. Gore. The conventional wisdom says play it safe in the primaries to have flexibility in a general election. But Mr. Gore would love a Bush challenge that ran merely on charisma and his Texas record. The veep would trump Texas by pointing to what by then could be eight years of prosperity and even further declines in crime and welfare. And after the Clinton chaos, Mr. Gore will gladly dare to be boring.

"We'll get killed if we play it safe," says Ed Gillespie, a GOP strategist now advising long-shot candidate Rep. John Kasich. Adds Jeff Bell, the strategic brains behind Gary Bauer: "You have to change the subject away from the stuff that Clinton and Gore have a good record on. I don't think that's self-evident to Bush, or to the Republican National Committee."

Mr. Bell thinks this means addressing the moral issues, which Mr. Bush has done on occasion in Texas. But it could also mean tying Mr. Gore to teacher's unions and the education status quo, or scoring him for opposing individual Social Security accounts. Mr. Bush's advisers say he understands this, but there's no better focus group than primary voters.

As I was leaving an interview with Mr. Bush last autumn, the governor was halfway inside his car when he suddenly walked back to make a point. "I want you to know something," he said. "If I run I'm going to win."

Republicans who really want a winner should delay the coronation until he proves he can win.