The election in 1960 was heart-breakingly close for the sitting vice president who came up just short of victory. The pain was even more acute because Vice President Richard Nixon had many of the benefits of incumbency going for him in the campaign, and he would have succeeded the popular President Dwight Eisenhower.

The president-elect who did win was said to have no clear mandate. Earlier in his life, John F. Kennedy was regarded as something of a playboy, and only later did he mature. Many serious people thought that though the new president-elect clearly had real political skills, he was untested and unready for the highest office in the land.

Yes, this is the story of 1960 - not 2000. But even though 40 years separate the elections of John F. Kennedy and George Walker Bush, there are striking parallels in terms of challenges to face and skills and opportunities to seize.

Though John F. Kennedy very narrowly won the election of 1960, he took careful and realistic stock of what his mandate was and, just as importantly, what it was not. He came to power at a time of economic uncertainty that followed eight years of unprecedented prosperity. The Cold War was at its depths. At home the civil rights revolution was just beginning its historic sweep across the land.

So carefully - and brilliantly - John F. Kennedy began building the broader mandate in power that had eluded him in the campaign. He began a significant build-up of our military and went against conventional wisdom in his own party by proposing tax cuts to stimulate the economy. At home, his administration accelerated - too slowly for many in his own party - the push for civil rights. But, partly by keeping a shrewd weather eye on where the American people were, John F. Kennedy was able quickly to become an extremely popular president. Had he not been cruelly cut down by an assassin?s bullet in Dallas in 1963, John F. Kennedy would have been remembered more for what he did in life than for his tragic death.

Forty years later, there is some reason to believe that George Walker Bush, chastened by the closeness of his win but bolstered by a clear desire for change and renewal, might assemble a winning coalition for America just as John F. Kennedy did. The only significant difference may be the way the national broadcast media treat President Bush during the first six months of his term.

After a very tough election and the lengthy and bitter re-count contest in Florida there are plenty of signs of a bipartisan willingness to tackle America's problems. The Democratic minority leaders of the House and Senate have now pledged cooperation. And closer to home, such Democrats as U.S. Rep. Bob Clement of Nashville and U.S. Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia, say they want to work with President-elect Bush.

Though much has been written and said in recent weeks about how President-elect Bush will face a divided America and a hostile Congress, the president-elect will enter office with a significantly stronger hand than any recent president of his own party. In fact, President Bush will be the first Republican since Dwight Eisenhower in 1953 - 48 years ago!!! - to enter office with his own party controlling BOTH houses of Congress.

Twenty years ago, Ronald Reagan took power with Democrats in solid control of the U.S. House; and during the last two of his eight years in office, his party controlled NEITHER house of Congress. Yet Ronald Reagan was able to mount an arms build-up and crusade of conscience that eventually helped the West triumph in the Cold War and to enact major reforms that laid the basis for much of the prosperity we have enjoyed since then.

The positive view is that Gov. Bush, starting from a relatively stronger position, can accomplish at least as much. Gov. Bush's record in Texas shows that he is able to reach across party lines to make progress in education, tax reform and health care. President-elect Bush campaigned as "a uniter, not a divider." Focusing on issues that unite Americans and avoiding "hot-button" issues that inflame different groups, Gov. Bush ran a campaign that was almost prophetic in that it established the president-elect exactly as the kind of decent, reasonable and unifying leader our nation needs now. During the transition he has shown the political skills and personal charm to reach out to all Americans. So President-elect Bush can with fair and balanced media coverage build a moderately-right-of-center governing coalition with Republicans and moderate Democrats in Congress.

And - much like the campaign of 40 years ago - the one just concluded showed that there was a remarkable consensus on the challenges facing our nation. Republicans and Democrats agree that we must strengthen Social Security, improve Medicare, making these programs sound for the coming wave of baby boomer retirements, and find a way to provide prescription drugs for our seniors. We also should give American patients more protection in their dealings with health insurance providers. There is widespread consensus across the land that our schools need fixing and that our military needs to be better paid, better equipped, more flexible and ready for the challenges of the 21st Century.

With the economy showing signs of softness, there is also growing agreement that we should enact tax reform, almost certainly including relief from the unfair marriage penalty and the outdated death tax.

So as the passions of the lengthy and bitter election and post-election season fade, it becomes clear that in the first presidential administration of the 21st Century, George Walker Bush is positioned to bring about constructive, broad-based and bipartisan reform and renewal. Given Bush's pleasant personality and established integrity coupled with most Americans' basic sense of fairness, there is reason to believe that the 43rd President of the United States will be successful at forging a new agenda of cooperation and progress.