(2 of 2)
Enter Ross Perot, a paranoid hoist by his own self-regard who could nonetheless end up as Bush's secret weapon. Most observers are focusing on the state-by-state matchups -- whom Perot will hurt more in which key states, a crystal-ball exercise whose only safe conclusion at this point is that Perot hurts either Clinton or Bush or both or neither. Meanwhile, Baker & Co. believe that victory requires blowing the current campaign dynamic across the board; surgical strikes won't do. "If Clinton fractures anywhere, he will fracture everywhere," says a Bush campaign official. "Perot serves that possibility because even though he's crazy, on the economy he's considered a straight-shooting truth teller. Of all the potential third-party nuisances we could think of, Perot alone has the standing to describe both of our economic plans as pain-free nonsense -- which is fine by us. Please, Ross, tar us both."
Perot will of course play this role with relish. It's his only card, the ticket to rehabilitating his reputation. A few Republicans are fretting (Perot's an "egotistical pest," says former Education Secretary Bill Bennett), but the party's big guns are smartly encouraging Perot to follow his instincts: "If Ross Perot's re-entry puts even more focus on the federal deficit," says Senator Bob Dole, "it will be a plus for everyone . . ." Thus, in the debates, Bush will defend his record, but he will gladly take the hit as long as Perot swipes equally at Clinton, which he is bound to do. As Clinton strikes back, he and Perot could descend into an unfathomable numbers war about growth stimulants and deficit philosophy, permitting Bush to portray both men as simply too willing to raise taxes -- an attack that could force Clinton to defend his plan with a few thousand academically sound but mind-boggling words reminiscent of Mark Twain's crack about Wagner's music: "It's better than it sounds."
The final step? "After the debates, we have the last two weeks to blitz Clinton on the character stuff," says a Bush strategist. "It's desperate, but it's coherent, and if Ross performs as expected, it hangs together theoretically." Call it what Baker called it -- reasonable doubt. As Bush aide Robert Mosbacher said some months ago, all the President needs on Election Day is to be considered "the lesser of three evils."