Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Colson RE: strategies for the closing months of the 1972 campaign. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/13/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26145165
label
WHSF: Contested, 7-65
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26145165
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 7-65
description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Colson RE: strategies for the closing months of the 1972 campaign. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/13/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26145165
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a7d2b560b9ec0a14
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
7
65
9/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to Haldeman, Ehrlichman,
and Colson RE: strategies for the closing
months of the 1972 campaign. 5 pgs.
Friday, July 02, 2010
Page 1 of 1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 13, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
JOHN EHRLICHMAN
CHARLES COLSON
FROM:
PAT BUCHANAN
Beginning Monday, there are but seven weeks left in the Presidential
campaign. Our two operative principles on the attack in those seven
weeks should be a) the issues of 1972 have long ago been decided and
made and b) we should re-cycle those issues, points and positions
which resulted in the collapse of the McGovern campaign. There seems
to be a tendency on our part at times to seek out some new indiscretion
on the part of the Opposition and attack that simply because it is "new. "
When we have an airtight case of forcible rape -- this is like saying,
"And yeah, we can get him for jaywalking, too. 11
In the last few days, in my judgment, we have allowed McGovern to
"lead" the national debate; our major political statements have focused
(i. e., Butz counter-charges, and MacGregor) precisely on those issues
McGovern thinks are the only winners he has. In addition, we have
sought to counter the charges of campaign financing finagling with the
old discredited "tu quoque" argument ("you're another") -- which
is the weakest of all arguments.
Meanwhile, little has gone into the public record in the last several
days from us -- which focuses on and advances the major personal
and political issues which are ours. This is partly our fault; but
partly the reason is that we now need heavier guns than the ones we
have been using.
There may be a point to muddying up the matter -- but we have other
fish to fry this fall; and we ought to be about that business.
THE FIRST WEEK. I would open up with two barrels this week. The
first is Foreign Policy. And the Vice President is the man. High-level
defense of RN's brilliant foreign policy is first third and then into
McGovern's Asian and European policies as enunciated by him and Chayes.
-2-
Filled in with McGovern quotes; McGovern on the POWs; McGovern
on the Middle East. Conclusion and lead -- George McGovern is a
well-intentioned, but naive bungler, whose foreign policy views are
foolish and would be dangerous to the peace and security of the
United States and the world. Call for a national debate on two
opposing views of America's role in the world. The second barrel
would be a John B. Connally, highly publicized response to McGovern,
hammering on the title Confidence and Credibility. All of the McGovern
waffles would be rolled into this one on the credibility side -- the
McGovern flip-flops -- then also, in a peroration, the worst of the
McGovern radical rhetoric. Why John Connally broke with McGovern,
could include Hoover remark, Hitler remarks, etc. Extremist rhetoric
unbefitting a presidential candidate -- least of all these charges is what
he says about me. If we could get that peroration onthe air; "the
language of an extremist" we could resurrect our big winner. Also,
to be included here is the Humphrey, Jackson, Muskie and Meany
statements -- the more brutal ones on McGovern. Why Democrats
are staying away in droves.
The two speeches would be on different days -- maybe two days apart.
Given free time, I could get done the entire first speech and the "core"
of the second.
What we ought to remember in both these speeches is that the press is
less interested in writing about a pro-speech, than they a re about
attack material -- whether the attack is high level or low level. Both
speeches should be built up -- and we should make our television on
them those nights.
Note: The attack group should be aware of what the President is doing
that day also for media -- he can knock us off the front pages and
the networks quicker than anyone else.
THE SECOND WEEK. Economics and Welfare. Connally and/or
the Veep would be excellent on Economics. Reagan, if he would do
one of our speeches, would be ideal on Welfare at the National Press
Club.
The economic speech would give the voters a choice between the present
prosperity and radical change -- radical change that would mean a busted
stock market (capital gains tax), a destroyed aerospace industry and
an undeclared economic war in the American middle class. The
McGovern previous proposals should be regurgitated; his simplistic
and naive approach should be laid out. His $100 billion increase in
budget and thousand in taxes the lead. The language in an economic
-3-
speech is vital. We could work on this one as well. The Welfare
speech should focus on McGovern, of course, as in favor of pouring
millions more in;putting millions more onto the rolls.
These items should serve as the key for surrogate speakers as well.
However, the letters operation need not be geared in to this in
our judgment that should be moving the negative, radical material
on McGovern into the key states at full blast. We can be much more
direct in letters than in rhetoric.
THE THIRD WEEK. The Social Issue. In this week a major address
should be written, again preferably with the Veep in the lead-off
contrasting the President and McGovern on social issues. Marijuana
and drugs. McGovern's endorsement of the Black Caucus and what
it contains. Bussing, bussing, bussing. RN versus McGovern on the
use of scatter-site housing; amnesty. While the Vice President can
high level this -- laying out the deep differences between the two --
others can really start hitting hard on the issue. Also, law and
order, the Hoover quote -- etc. This can all be drawn into this
question. This is 1970 politics, but the issues are ours this time,
and if we can get McGovern talking on them, they are winners. No
name-calling -- just point out here the radical record.
THE FOURTH WEEK. Defense. This is one area McGovern has held
fast. We could lay out his defense budget at the top level and portray
it as an invitation to disaster in Europe, the Mideast, the world, the
future. Again, here we have quotes from Jackson and Humphrey to
back us up. And two days after the defense speech -- there is rel eased
the "ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE MCGOVERN DEFENSE
BUDGET" from Laird to Capitol Hill, giving state by state the
number of jobs lost by McGovern Defense Budget and aerospace cuts,
also the number of bases shut down and exactly which ones and where.
All laid out, special mailing to every newspaper in every state in the
country. Something he will never catch up with.
Within this week as well, we ought to have some real tough speeches
in the aerospace communities, the "Ghost Town" stuff. Also, the
same thing they did to us around the military bases in 1970. Included
in the military stuff would be McGovern's attack on the Military
Industrial Complex whereas what he is talking about is the workers
at GE, McDonnell, etc.
If we go this route, we are at the Middle of October -- there is no need
now to decide what we will do those last three weeks. This includes
our basic inventory of large, overall issues. Other sub-themes
include:
-4-
A)
The Ellsberg connection, tying McGovern to him and his
crime as soon as the indictment come down, if McGovern insists
on charging people, uncharged by the Grand Jury. This would be a
separate tough attack; and it should be echoes all over the country.
B)
Space, and defense should of course be on-going issues for any
speaker in a community near an aerospace plant or military base.
Perhaps our Nixon people ought to be doing what they did to us in
1970 put out the rumor around every big base in the country that
if McGovern is elected this base will shut down, this plant will close.
C)
The McGovern Quotes need to be gotten out. We will do
another mailing on the Best Twenty-five -- and maybe the time has
come to move them and our Attack Book (truncated) to the National
Press, or at least the most friendly of the national columnists.
D)
The Democratic Party and its rescue. This is an ideal
Connally Big Speech some time, urging Democrats to take back the
party of their fathers, by repudiating the extremists who have seized
it in November. In the speech, he could lay out cold all the radical
leftism, and extremism of McGovern positions, a real blistering
speech on McGovern, the kind that the President and the Vice President
cannot make -- but hitting him on the twenty odd issues where he has
been so vulnerable. The kind of thing that Human Events would publish
genuinely hard, which we could then get out into the hands of our entire
speakers list from top to bottom to use, as their basic text.
E)
We have to start back to getting the Democratic anti-McGovern
quotes into the record again -- The Meany, Humphrey, Jackson quotes.
Also, the "elitism" and "extremism" themes need to be renewed to
the average voter.
F)
The attack group should continue -- making sure that these
themes are moved week-by-week -- still meeting day-by-day to key
off something McGovern has said, to fire at targets of opportunity,
to program our people on the media to keep moving all these good
materials we have back into the public record again and again.
The Hoover quotes and the quotes on the Chicago Police are two
examples. Our objective should be to either move McGovern off of his
Watergate issue, onto our issues or kill him on our issues; secondly,
to continually break any momentum he develops by changing the
subject in a week.
FINAL NOTE: Again, the critical point is that just as McGovern ought
to make "Nixon" the issue so the issue this fall is McGovern. Will
-5-
he and the hard-core left-winger radicals who took over the party
take over America. That's the bottom line. If the country goes
to the polls in November, scared to death of McGovern, thinking
him vaguely anti-America and radical and pro the left-wingers and
militants, then they will vote against him -- which means for us.
What we have done thus far, and fairly well, is not put the President
thrity-four points ahead -- but McGovern thirty-four points behind.
The best tribute to what we have done, I think, came from McGovern
I believe just after the convention when he said -- "They've got
fifteen guys shooting at me from all sides while the President's
acting like he's not even in a campaign. 11 If we can continue that,
we' re golden.
Buchanan