NEWS ANALYSIS : Clinton Pinned Between Wings of Party : Politics: He must please Democratic liberals and conservatives in Congress to advance his economic program. But earlier defeat provided lessons.

For the second time in his four months as President, Bill Clinton finds himself caught in a trap--pinned between his party’s conservative and liberal wings without a working majority for his economic program.

Last time, the trap closed on Clinton and doomed his economic stimulus package, giving the President an early defeat that sent shudders through his young Administration. This time, Clinton and his aides are determined to see that the outcome is different.

The essential dilemma of governing with a divided party remains. But as the White House began to roll out its legislative strategy over the last several days, clear signs emerged that Clinton and his aides have learned some lessons from their bitter defeat earlier this spring.

The first indications came Wednesday. During the maneuvering over the stimulus bill, White House officials now concede, one key mistake was to spurn compromise proposals by Sen. John B. Breaux (D-La.), a key Southern moderate. “How about really spurned,” Breaux said recently when asked to describe his treatment.

Not this time. Wednesday evening, Clinton held a private meeting with Breaux to ensure that he would not join his fellow moderate, Oklahoma Sen. David L. Boren, in a plan that would eliminate some of Clinton’s proposed tax increases and make additional cuts in spending--including to Social Security and Medicare.

The move worked, at least for now. Not long after Boren offered his plan Thursday morning, Breaux registered his opposition. Keeping Breaux neutral “was tremendously significant,” a senior Clinton adviser said. “Last time, he and Boren were hand-in-hand.”

A second mistake during the stimulus plan debate, Clinton aides concede, was to ask House Democrats to cast politically difficult votes on controversial items that were then dealt away by the White House in Senate negotiations.

Wednesday morning, Clinton spoke to the House Democratic caucus and swore not to repeat that error. “If you go out on a limb, I’ll go out with you,” he said. All day Thursday, White House officials repeated that line, reassuring nervous House Democrats that Clinton would stand by them.

A third error--and perhaps the most crucial--during the debate on the stimulus bill was to allow the opposition, led by Republican Senate leader Bob Dole of Kansas, to define the battle for many Americans by speaking out regularly while the President, occupied by pressing foreign and personal concerns, said little about it in public.

Thursday, Clinton and his aides moved aggressively to ensure that would not happen this time. Shortly after Boren described the choice between his plan and Clinton’s as one between higher taxes and lower spending, Clinton and his aides sought to redefine Boren’s alternative.

“Sen. Boren’s alternative is going to lower taxes on the wealthy and pay for it by cutting Social Security benefits for millions of seniors,” White House Communications Director George Stephanopoulos said in a comment that set the tone for the day. In contrast with some previous efforts, the White House message was consistent and focused.

“What you’re about to see is a debate over whether the rich should be taxed,” said Clinton media adviser Mandy Grunwald. “That’s a fight that’s good for the President.”

As the White House hammered away, Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen lobbied members of the Senate Finance Committee to guard against defections that might give the Boren plan momentum.

The goal, officials said, was not only to shape the public debate, but also to reassure potentially nervous members of the House that the President’s plan was not fatally hemorrhaging in the Senate.

“The only thing that is keeping the House up in the air is the Senate,” one senior White House official said. “Otherwise, they are for it.”

Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City) said: “House Democrats understand the importance of supporting the President’s package, and what that means for deficit reduction. Weighed against that is the notion that it could be a futile act.”

By day’s end, White House officials felt they had succeeded in staying ahead of the debate. Their majority in the House, while small, appears stable, Administration vote-counters said. But they admitted that they still face a fundamental problem born of the delicate nature of Clinton’s electoral coalition, especially in the Senate. “If we were to bring it to a vote now, we don’t have a majority” in the Senate, a senior Clinton adviser conceded. “But after we work it for a while, we will.”

The problem is that if Clinton “works it” by moving toward deeper budget cuts in an effort to placate conservatives, he could lose the support of party liberals. And if he keeps faith with the liberals, he stands to lose the votes of conservatives.

Unfortunately for the President, given the narrow six-vote majority the Democrats hold in the Senate and the opposition of the Republicans to his plan, he cannot succeed without both groups.

“It’s a mighty fragile coalition we’ve got in this goddarn party, and this guy is walking the line,” said a senior Democratic strategist.

The chief factor Clinton has going for him at this point, Democratic strategists say, is the sense on Capitol Hill that the stakes are high not only for the President, but for his party as well.

“Every Democrat has to understand that whatever complaints he has about the budget, failure to pass a bill would be a terrible blow to the idea that the Democratic Party--with a President in the White House and a majority in Congress--can govern,” said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles).

“There are a lot of people who have a stake in passage of this,” the senior Clinton adviser said. The stimulus bill was just a piece of the program, “now we’re talking about the whole ball of wax.”

Times staff writer Karen Tumulty contributed to this story.