American presidential politics provide a prime example of the old adage that history often repeats itself.

The two major parties rebound, often quickly, from even the worst electoral disasters. Second terms are difficult, even disastrous. The vice presidency is the second-best route to the presidency.

Patterns of particular campaigns also recur, though sometimes several past scenarios could fit.

At this stage, the 2008 campaign shows signs of mirroring at least three recent races. The question is which foreshadows the ultimate outcome.

Here are the arguments:

IS IT LIKE 1960?

Like the epic battle between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon, this campaign pits a charismatic, though inexperienced, young warrior against a more experienced, though somewhat shopworn, veteran. By all signs, Barack Obama is the superior campaigner and creates more excitement on the trail.

And the political climate suggests this should be a Democratic year, as 1960 was.

But the fact that Obama's election would break a historic barrier as Kennedy's did is a mixed blessing. While blacks will vote in large numbers for him, the later Democratic primaries showed signs of a white backlash.

In 1960, Kennedy's strong support from fellow Roman Catholics was offset by resistance among some Protestants.

In the end, despite his superior campaigning skills and strong performance in the first televised debates, the vote was very close. This one could be, too.

OR 1980?

As was the case then, the country wants change. But the outcome may depend on whether Obama, like Ronald Reagan, can overcome doubts about his experience or if a majority of voters opt for the safety of John McCain — even though he would pursue some policies the country considers failures.

In 1980, many voters clearly had enough of Jimmy Carter. He won very few votes he lost four years earlier.

But the lead seesawed until the last week. Then, Reagan's performance in the only televised debate convinced enough undecided voters that they would be comfortable with him as president.

Other, less experienced candidates also overcame concerns in the debates: Kennedy in 1960, Bill Clinton in 1992 and George W. Bush in 2000.

This year, many analysts believe Obama's performance in the debates will determine if he satisfies enough current doubters.

OR 1988?

This race also matched a relative newcomer against an experienced, less-than-inspiring veteran who sought to raise doubts about his rival's background, ideology and leadership.

In the spring, the newcomer, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, held a considerable lead in the polls over his more experienced rival, Vice President George H. W. Bush.

But the steady drumbeat of criticism focusing on Dukakis' record in Massachusetts, much of it answered ineffectively, enabled Bush to overcome that deficit.

Dukakis was still within reach, though behind, when he ensured his defeat with a stilted response to a very personal question about whether he would overcome his doubts about the death penalty if the victim were his wife.

The debates again were decisive, and the lesser-known candidate failed his test.

This summer, Obama has been under growing attack from McCain and his Republican allies, accused of everything from flip-flopping on issues to being personally arrogant. The next few months may determine if, like Dukakis, he defeats himself.

But McCain lacks the advantage Bush had as the chosen successor of a popular president.

Other elections also bear some similarities to the 2008 race. In 1952 and 1968, unpopular wars crippled the incumbent administration and led to election of the rival party. But 1960, 1980 or 1988 seem most likely to provide the decisive pattern for this election.

Carl P. Leubsdorf is Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News.