Dirty Trickster -- H. Ross Perot, All Hat , And No Cattle

NEW YORK - You almost have to feel sorry for the Democrats. They can't catch a break.

Here they stage a practically perfect convention; very nearly Republican in its orderliness. Oh, Jerry Brown made a little noise, but that was mainly comic relief.

More importantly, the two great dissident lions of the party, Mario Cuomo and Jesse Jackson, had been brought into the Clinton tent and persuaded to feign enthusiasm for his candidacy. For perhaps the first time since 1964 the Democrats had achieved the first goal of any successful convention; they had convinced themselves they had a chance to win.

Then, just as they are about to unveil their new, improved hero, Ross Perot rains on their parade. The Texas strongman bowed out of the race. Did I say "bowed?" Crawled is more like it.

To tell you the truth, I was shocked. I didn't figure him for just another Texas loudmouth; all hat, no cattle.

He said that he didn't want to be disruptive to the political process. Oh, sure. That's ol' Ross. He just doesn't want to be a bother. Gimme a break.

Perot has a record of walking away from projects that don't go exactly as he'd planned. He did it with General Motors, he did it with that Wall Street brokerage he got suckered into bailing out. Now he's done it with the presidency. All that talk about going on a trip across the desert with short rations, of fighting to the finish, of not letting his people down; it was just so much moonshine. As it turned out, he was a sunshine patriot, ready to flee the political battlefield at the first shot.

I suppose we shouldn't have been surprised. We should have known that a boorish egomaniac couldn't be trusted to stand up when the going got tough. The real question is how a jerk like that ever made $2 billion. It must be easier than it looks.

Dropping out of the race was a dirty trick to play on his supporters, who threw themselves into his candidacy without any thought of personal gain. Now they feel not merely betrayed, but slightly ridiculous.

It was also a dirty trick to play on the press, which had depended on him to inject life into an otherwise dreary campaign. Make no mistake about it, it was Perot who had made this one of the most interesting political years in decades. The difference between a two-way race and a three-way race is the difference between checkers and chess. Now we're back to checkers.

And, most of all, it was a dirty trick to play on Bill Clinton. You can never be sure, but you have to think that a strong showing by Perot was crucial to Clinton's chances in November.

Without Perot to bleed conservative votes from the Republicans - particularly in Texas and California - Clinton is left going head-to-head against a sitting president with no disasters to his credit. A lousy economy, but no disasters. That is a daunting task.

One of the things Perot's candidacy should do, however, is give us greater respect for both Clinton and Bush.

Say what you will of them - character issues, wimp factors, whatever - they are tough guys, both of them. They can take a hit and give one. Running for the presidency is not a game. It is not a hobby. It is not amateur night. It is a grueling, brutal business that tests candidates in places they didn't know they had places.

It tested Perot and he came up short. Forget short; he came up empty. He was entered in a marathon and he thought it was a 100-yard dash.

I look for a really mean, no-holds-barred campaign this fall. I look for it to be negative and personal; I don't see where the candidates have much choice. Bush is out of ideas and the ideas that Clinton has cost too much.

So we're going to hear a lot of things about the relative merits of the candidates' wives, their children, their romantic histories, their patriotism, their devotion to God. Do not expect to hear a reasonable plan to attack the deficit.

Perot had a great opportunity to focus the race on real problems. It's too bad he wasn't up to the job.