(18 of 19)
It was Gingrich himself who set the bar so high for everyone. Failing to clear it can only breed more of the cynicism that put Washington, and more particularly Congress, in such foul repute in the first place. As things stand now, mistrust is growing both among those who have yearned for Gingrich's revolution and among those it terrifies. "Everybody who thinks change will be bad for them is scared," says Gingrich loyalist Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform. "Everybody who thinks change will be good for them doesn't believe it is going to happen."
One comfort may lie in the knowledge that for all the changes Gingrich has wrought and the controversy he has generated, neither Clinton nor Dole can afford to let him expire. A top Dole operative admitted last week that the Senate majority leader needs Newt around to play bad cop, to attack Clinton next year, while Dole poses as presidential, safely above the undisciplined, baby-boom fray. A critically wounded Newt can't perform that mission well. Once just a GOPAC mission, "Newt support" is now a G.O.P. imperative.
Gingrich needs Dole for his own reasons. He may not always trust the majority leader to bear the banner of the revolution. (He has called him "effective," though maybe not "comfortable" with it.) But that may not matter. What Gingrich needs is a Republican President, even a squishy one, to sign bills into law. He's already sketched the backdrop for the campaign. "When Bob Dole and Phil Gramm give a speech in New Hampshire, it's to a crowd of people who have Newt Gingrich's world view," says Norquist. If Dole wins, and Gingrich is still Speaker, it is hard to imagine the Republican President vetoing any major initiative that Congress sends to the White House.
As for Clinton, he needs Gingrich too. The Speaker has given the long embattled Commander in Chief his first effective foil since George Bush left the stage three years ago. Compared to Newt, Clinton can appear measured, careful with his words, disciplined in his behavior. Compared to Newt, Clinton looks like a wise elder, a steady commander of the armed forces. In that sense, Newt is Clinton's redemption, the man who made the President "relevant" again--and just when it started to count.
That dynamic is all the more surprising given the similarities between the two men. Born three years apart, each was the eldest child of a lively and worshipful mother; each tangled with a gruff stepfather. They both can produce elementary school teachers willing to testify that they each landed exactly where he always intended. Both are natural teachers, verbally promiscuous and deeply pragmatic. Both sacrificed everything for their public lives, but indulged themselves in their private lives: both are overeaters who tried pot and chased women. Neither served in Vietnam. And both own '67 Mustangs.