AMERICA was reintroduced this week to one of its most charming, gifted, relaxed, wily, plainspoken and ruthless politicians: George W. Bush, the candidate.

If the US President loses his re-election bid on November 2, a fate that is a real possibility, it will not be because he lacks the skills needed on the stump. Love him or loathe him, the past ten days have reminded voters and political journalists just what an effective campaigner Mr Bush is.

As he and John Kerry, his Democratic opponent, have engaged in the first intensive round of election-year combat, sparring with each other as they criss-crossed the country’s battleground states, even the Massachusetts senator’s friends admit that Mr Bush has run rings around him.

At the same time, Mr Bush has donned a persona with crowds that has proved disarmingly effective all his political life: funny, down to earth, slightly humble, with an artfully simple message delivered in skilfully crafted short sentences. It is an image that deliberately hides a man with formidable political gifts and instinct.

Just 11 weeks before polling day, Mr Bush does not have the strongest of electoral hands. His job-approval rating remains firmly stuck below 50 per cent, a perilous position for an incumbent president.

More than half the country is now unhappy with events in Iraq. Last week delivered deeply disappointing employment figures, with only 32,000 new jobs created in July.

Yet Mr Kerry’s dual message on Iraq and the economy was all but drowned out by a President who, helped by Dick Cheney, the Vice-President and his attack-dog-in-chief, outsmarted and out-joked him.

Mr Kerry’s problems began when Mr Bush challenged him for a yes-or-no answer on one of the critical campaign issues: if he knew last year before the invasion that no weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq, would he still have voted for the war? Mr Bush, whose own answer is an unequivocal yes, knew that Mr Kerry’s position on Iraq is by necessity more complicated, not least because he voted against Mr Bush’s later request for $87 billion in postwar reconstruction funds, at a time when he needed to appease the anti-war tide dominating the Democratic primary race.

In a sign that Mr Kerry is still struggling to crystalise a clear message on Iraq that convinces a majority of voters, he had to debate with his aides how to respond to Mr Bush.

On Monday, he declared that he still would have voted for the war, but handled the lead-up to war and the post-combat phase differently. Then Mr Kerry surprised aides by declaring that he could begin to reduce US troops in Iraq significantly within the first six months of his presidency.

On Tuesday, at a rally in Florida, Mr Bush pounced: “My opponent has found a new nuance. He now agrees it was the right decision to go into Iraq. But just remember, there are 83 days left in the campaign, time enough to change his mind again.”

Over troop reduction, he accused Mr Kerry of sending “mixed signals” on Iraq and giving succour to Iraqi militants. The senator’s aides were forced to issue “clarifications”.

Jo Biden, the veteran Democrat senator, conceded that the first round went to Mr Bush, despite the renewed insurgency in Iraq and poor job figures, which abruptly forced Mr Bush to drop the claim that America was “turning the corner” on the economy.

On Thursday, Mr Cheney ridiculed Mr Kerry for saying that he would fight a “more sensitive” War on Terror, ignoring the fact that Mr Bush used similar language last year.

Yesterday, as he ended his 15-day, 22-state cross-country tour in Oregon, Mr Kerry began what his aides said would be a two-week offensive on the economy. But that message was overshadowed largely by Mr Bush’s success in focusing on Mr Kerry’s position on Iraq and terrorism.

Meanwhile — perhaps reminding voters of one reason that he defeated Mr Gore (polls taken in 2000 revealed that Americans would far prefer to share a beer with Mr Bush) — carefully hand-picked audiences at “meet the President” events this week have seen a candidate at his most charming.

Mr Bush, in his last political campaign, does not even bother to hide that his audience is given pre-prepared questions. “I’ve asked some citizens to help me make my points,” he grinned at one event. “Go ahead, yell it out,” he shouted at another. “If I don’t like the question, I’ll reinvent it.”

In Ohio, one man said that his company made pumps, basically selling air to customers. Mr Bush said: “You and I are in the same business. Is it hot air, by any chance?” Nevertheless, Mr Bush is in the fight of his political life. He is running neck-and-neck with Mr Kerry, himself a veteran campaigner. Polls released yesterday showed that Mr Kerry had gained ground in three crucial swing states — Florida, Ohio and Michigan. The President is largely at the mercy of events in Iraq, and on the economy.

But as a campaigner, Mr Bush is fiercely disciplined, sharp-witted and will make few, if any, mistakes. And he knows how to keep his cool.

Just ask Ann Richards, the Texas Governor expected to destroy him in their 1994 race. Against an opponent she regarded as intellectually and politically inferior, she called him “clueless”, “Junior” and “the anaemic link at the tail end of the gilded Bush dynasty”. He called her “Governor Richards”. Finally, she exploded, calling him “some jerk” at a rally. Mr Bush won by six points.

Times Recommends

• Michael Jackson: Not the final chapter
• Indian Army spends10m rupees on golf buggies
• Brüno toned down for 15 rating