With less than two months to go until the US presidential election, the contest between Mr George W. Bush and Mr Al Gore is becoming more interesting. The pace has picked up demonstrably in recent weeks, as Mr Gore caught up on his opponent after the Democratic convention and now appears to hold a lead. Policies have been as important as personalities and perceived capacities in this process. All of these will play strongly in the weeks to come, especially through the three debates the candidates have now agreed to stage next month.
It is too early to assume a winner, despite media frenzies successively favouring each man. Mr Gore has certainly been the beneficiary of such assumptions recently. The more activist campaigner, he has successfully focused on policies appealing to the Democrats' traditional blue collar constituency - "working families" - as well as to the middle class swing voters on whose electoral behaviour results are conventionally assumed to rely. He has also become more popular with women voters. Whatever the explanation for these successes, they have put him strongly back in the running, after he lagged in polls and media estimates throughout the summer months.
Mr Gore played to his strengths as a political leader with an accomplished command of policy issues during and after his party convention, shaking off the incubus of President Clinton's personal record, while benefitting from his successful management of the US economy. Commentators say he has dumped Clinton and adopted Clintonism. But he has also adopted a distinctly more radical policy profile on issues such as corporate greed than Mr Clinton, without losing the support such a tack is usually assumed to involve.
This is in good part presentational, since much of his programme on welfare, education and health care is taken straight from Mr Clinton's policy repertoire; but Mr Gore has been helped by Mr Bush's commitment to a tax reduction package that clearly favours the better off. Many voters are also convinced by the argument that the Republican programme combined with Mr Bush's inexperience could endanger the long economic boom that has sustained Mr Clinton's popularity.
Mr Bush badly needs to find appealing themes to undermine his opponent and to convince Republican supporters and floating voters that he is the better man for the presidential job. He did not help himself by appearing reluctant to engage fully in the three television debates. He may benefit by probing Mr Gore's shaky record in campaign financing. He still has solid support in many of the crucial states where the results will be decided. And his personality appeals to many voters who find Mr Gore a wooden candidate and are ready for a change.
It is as well at this stage to remember two well established facts about US presidential election campaigns. For all their frenetic energy they may not greatly affect the outcome, since most people have already decided how they will vote - greatly influenced by their sense of economic well-being. Further, many voters have not yet focused clearly on the campaign and will do so only in the weeks to come. Opinion polls do not have a great record in predicting the winner. The safest assumption is that it is still all to play for.