Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "1554444",
    "label": "Third Debate: Memos from Duval",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554444"
}

{
    "id": "1554444",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554444",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Third Debate: Memos from Duval",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554444",
    "collections": [
        "White House Special Files Unit Files",
        "Ford - Carter Debates Files"
    ],
    "subjects": [
        "Campaign debates",
        "Presidential campaign, 1976",
        "Public opinion polls"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/44/5544/1554444/content/library/document/0010/1554444.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/44/5544/1554444/content/library/document/0010/1554444.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/44/5544/1554444/content/library/document/0010/1554444.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554444",
    "naId": 1554444,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "day": 18,
        "logicalDate": "1976-10-18",
        "month": 10,
        "year": 1976
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "day": 18,
        "logicalDate": "1976-10-18",
        "month": 10,
        "year": 1976
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/44/5544/1554444/content/library/document/0010/1554444.pdf",
    "mediaId": "53a33d8d7f338ee2",
    "ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box 3, folder \"Third Debate: Memos from Duval\" of\nthe White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nTHE PRESIDENT\nLAST DEBATE MEMORANDUMS\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nOctober 18, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nFORD LIBRARY\nFROM:\nMIKE DUVAL\nWho\nSUBJECT:\nLast Debate\nThere is one suggestion which keeps coming up, primarily\nfrom people in Southern California. It is that you\nrespond to a Carter \"non-answer\" to a question with the\nfollowing statement:\n\"Mr. Carter has once again refused to\nanswer the question. The question was\n.\nI yield the remaining time I have for\nthis rebuttal to Mr. Carter if he will\nanswer directly the question asked of\nhim.\"\nThis isn't a bad idea, but obviously would only work if\nCarter did not expect it. The fact is that so many people\nhave made this suggestion, I am certain Carter has been fore-\nwarned.\nAccordingly, I recommend that you do not use this ploy.\nInstead, we will provide you with a recommended response to\nCarter's refusal to answer the question.\nSECOND DEBATE\nPRO CARTER\nPRO FORD\n\"\nmoterator\n30\n09\nAnti-HAK and Nixon\nD\nCarter's would let\n=\ni\nCommunists in Italian Govt.\n5\nFireside Chat\nI'l\n21\nNegotiated with Soviets from strength\nEASTERN\nEuropean\n25\nRemarks\n5\nUE\nWeapons to\nof\nIran\n135\n35\nWon't sell China arms\nOH\n41\n\"[]\n45\n\"\n3\n09\nanti-Ford\nnuclear policy\ncomments re SAI\n55\n5\nwe are weak\n5\n60\n65\nKorea\nHAK criticism\nPanama Canal\n70\nTL\nDelay in releasing Mayagues details\n\"\n75\nMayaguez\n1L\n14\nArab Boycott\n08\nMia's\nof\n19 Arab Boycott\n80\n85\n&\nEnd Carter\nClosing remarks\n78\nEnd President's\nClosing Remarks\n06\nmoderator\nFIRST DEBATE\nPRO CARTER\nPRO FORD\nBERALD FORD LIBRARY\nModers oders for\n50\n3\nn\nTax Cuts\nUII,\nUI\n5\nis :\n12\nr\nFederal Government is a mess\nI\n21\nSign Tax Bill\nv\n&\n125\n30\nBureaucratic Mess\nof\n2\n4\nCarter's Record as Governor\n35\nwe\n35\n25\nLE\nAnti-Crime\nof\noll\nBE\nTax Cut\nEnergy Crises\n13\ngt\nIN\nCTI\n5\n÷\n47\n50\nes\n15\n5\n34 Carter Spendi\n99\n57\nTax Reform\nis\n09\n65\nDemocrats wrote\ntax laws\n70\nmorality\nspending\nCongress\n75\nit\n(Audio Interruption)\n08\nClosing remarks\n6\nTl.\n85\n98\nClosing Remarks\n06\nmoterator\n95\nTAB A\nFIRST DEBATE\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\nPRO CARTER\nPRO FORD\n3\noders tor\nOE\n60\n6\n01\n4\n51\nUII\nTax Cuts\n6\nEy is È\n12\ny\nFederal Government is a mess\n2\n20\nSign Tax Bill\nis\n&\n25\ne\nBE\nBureaucratic Mess\n15\n35\n2\n$\nCarter's Record as Governor\n£\n35\n36\n37\nAnti-Crime\n01\nV\n0/1\n8F\nTax Cut\nEnergy Crises\nSt\n\" 43 ÷\n471\n50\nes\n15\n55\nCarter Spendi\n99\n57\nTax Reform\nbs\n09\n6/\nis\n65\nDemocrats wrote\ntax laws\n70\nmorality\nspending\nCongress\n75\n08\n(Audio Interruption)\nClosing remarks\n8\n18\nThe\n85\n98\nClosing Remarks\n06\nmoderator\n99\nSECOND DEBATE\nFORD & LIBRARY\nPRO CARTER\nPRO FORD\n1\nmoverator\n30\n60\nAnti-HAK and Nixon\nCarter's would let\n)\n=\nCommunists in Italian Govt.\nFireside Chat\n1.1\nNegotiated with Soviets from strength\nuc\nEASTERN EUROPEAN REMARKS\n25\nWeapons to\nor\nUL\nIran\n34\n35\n35\nWon't sell China arms\n4\non\n45\n09\nanti-Ford\nnuclear policy\ncomments re SALI\n55\nwe are weak-\n09\n65\nKorea\nHAK criticism\nPanama Canal\n70\nA\nTL\n\"\nDelay in releasing Mayagues details\nMayaguez\n75\nHL\nArab Boycott\n08\nMia's\nArab Boycott\n02\n85\nEnd Carter\nEnd President's\nClosing remarks\nClosing Remarks\n06\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nOctober 18, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nMIKE DUVAL\nMike\nSUBJECT:\nLast Debate\nBACKGROUND\nBased on our polling data, you clearly won the first debate and\nprobably won, or at least did as well as Carter in the second\ndebate. The panels polled by Teeter following the second debate\nshowed you with an 11 point lead before the press reaction to your\nEastern European remark began to play. By the time the press had\nblasted at you for 24 hours you were down 45 points. The lesson\nto be learned from this is that your debating style for the first\ntwo debates has not been a problem. Although we will suggest\nsome minor refinements further on in this memo, it is clear that\nyour Eastern European remark (while it did not particularly impact\nthe viewing public at the time of the debate), became the focus\nof press criticism and it was the criticism that had the impact\non the voting public. In addition, Carter succeeded -- to some\nextent - - in putting you on the defensive at the beginning of\nthe second debate. He will probably try this again next time.\nYour advisers believe you should go into the last debate with the\nobjective of a clear victory over Carter. This will be the largest\naudience you will have between now and the election. You should\nuse it to make a positive and forceful appeal for their votes.\nOBJECTIVES FOR LAST DEBATE\nBob Teeter advises that you should attempt to reach the following\naudiences during your last debate:\n1. Rural, moderately conservative, traditionally\nGOP voters;\n2. Traditionally Democratic-leaning, blue collar\nvoters in the big suberbs; and\n3. Upper middle class ticket splitters who also\nlive in the suberbs of the big cities.\nGEEALS FORD LIBRARY\nPage 2\nThere are two major themes that appeal to all three groups:\nFORD\nMaintaining the peace, and\nLIBRARY\nLower taxes.\nYou should take every opportunity during the debate to make\nthese two points forcefully and with as many varied examples\nand anecdotes as possible.\nYou must emphasize the importance of this election by pointing\nout the major differences between you and Mr. Carter, not the\nminor ones. You should emphasize the fact that he is\ninexperienced and unknown. Compare this with your record for the\npast two years and your vision of the next four. You should\nclose with a direct appeal for voter support on November 2.\nSUGGESTIONS CONCERNING STYLE\nOne consensus that has emerged as your advisers (such as\nBill Carruthers) reviewed the second debate tape is that you\nappear to have been overly concerned with the television cameras.\nIn the first debate you were more natural and appeared at ease\nwhile talking primarily to the panelist that asked the question.\nIn the second debate you seemed more concerned with the cameras\nand thus appeared to lose some concentration on the substance of\nyour answer.\nThis undoubtedly was a result of the many criticisms expressed\nto you after the first debate to the effect that you should look\nat the camera more often.\nAn example of how much more effective you are when talking\nto your questioner can be found in your excellent performance\nat last week's press conference. By relating directly to the\nquestioner, your answers tend to be short, responsive and human.\nThis may be because of the feedback you get from the questioner\nby way of nods or \"signals\" which give you a cue when you have\nfully answered the question. In any event, by concentrating on\nthe panel in the next debate you should come off as more relaxed\nand candid.\nTherefore, we continue to recommend that you essentially address\nyour answer to the questioner, looking only at the camera when\nyou want to make a point directly to the viewing public. This\ntransition should be natural and keyed to the substance of what\nyou are saying.\nPage 3\nAlso, you may wish to keep in mind if you do talk directly\nto the camera you really are not perceived (by the viewer)\nas talking to 80-100 million people. You are perceived as\ntalking to just those people in the room watching the\ntelevision set, which, on the average is likely to be a single\ncouple or a family. Thus, you should keep in mind that you\nare talking to people in the intimacy of their living room and\nyour tone should be more conversational than that of a stump\nspeech.\nAnother point on which there is substantial agreement concerns\nthe loudness of your voice when responding. Many viewers\nperceive you to be shouting and this is in marked contrast to\nCarter's responses which tend to vary in pitch and be much more\nmodulated and 1ow-keyed. Given the technical control the pool\nproducer has over audio level, you can speak much more softly\nwithout any fear of not being heard or understood.\nA third point which many have made concerns the appearance you\ngive of being overly stern. Although this is helpful at times to\nindicate strength and dominance over Carter, the fact is, it\nhas not varied in the two debates and you now come across to\nsome as angry and strident.\nTo summarize, your advisers (principally Carruthers, Gergen,\nTeeter, Baily and Deardourff), have two general recommendations\nconcerning style:\n1. Be more natural, at ease. Approach the debate\nas you did the press conference where you directly\nrespond to the questioner, looking at the camera\nwhere it is natural to do so, but keeping a personal\nrelationship between your questioner and yourself.\n2. Vary the pace of the debate. Alternate - - as it\nbecomes natural to do so, based on the questions\nand the statements by Carter -- between:\nserious, stern;\nhitting Carter directly and hard three or\nfour times (not often and not in a knit-\npicking manner); ;\nFORD\nshow some humor, a smile and even (if\nappropriate) a laugh; and\nLIBRARY\nshow compassion with a soft voice and\nperhaps obvious emotion while relating a\npersonal experience.\nPage 4\nYOUR ANSWERS/RESPONSES\nThe following are some general recommendations concerning the\ncontent of your answers/responses during the third debate:\n1. Keep them Short. Your answers and responses in the\nsecond debate were generally longer than during the\nfirst encounter. Your shorter responses tend to be\nbetter organized and more forcefully stated.\nBob Hartmann makes the additional point that it would\nbe very useful if you can answer just one question\nwith a simple yes or no. Teeter agrees with this\nbut feels a brief sentence or two in explanation\nmight be appropriate. It is obvious from reviewing\nthe first two tapes that there is no need to use all\nyour time and indeed you score your best points with\nshort, crisp, sentences that make a point with one or\ntwo facts to support your argument.\n2. Be Responsive and Positive. It appeared to us in\nreviewing the second debate that you often did not\nfocus on the question or on Carter's response. It\nmay be useful this time to jot down the question\ndirected to Carter so you can refer to it specifically\nin your rebuttal. It may also be useful for you to\nvery briefly repeat the essence of the question asked\nof you so that you can demonstrate your willingness to\ndeal forthrightly and directly with the question. If\nyou concentrate on the specific question asked and on\nthe specific statements being made by Carter, you are\nmore likely to come across in a natural, relaxed and\nresponsive manner, much like your performance in last\nweek's press conference. After giving a short, but\ndirect response to the question you can go on and\nmake the key points (themes) which are covered in the\nnext section.\nWe recommend that you set a positive, up-lifting tone\nin the last debate. Demonstrate by how you deal with\nthe questions and Carter's attacks that you are the\nPresident and the other guy is an over-ambitious, light-\nweight challenger. Always take the high ground and leave\nthe cheap shots to Carter. Although we are not certain,\nthe public may well believe that the campaign has sunk\nto a very low level of petty charges and counter-charges.\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nPage 5\nThe press certainly has this view. Your post\ndebate reviews will benefit considerably if you\nare perceived to have taken the high road.\nBy being positive and referring to the future\nyou will not be on the defensive a crucial\npoint in terms of \"winning\" the debate.\n3. Give simple answers that communicate thoughts,\nnot statistics. Many of us felt that your answers\nin the first two debates (particularly the second),\nwhile technically accurate and powerful, nevertheless\ncontained so many statistics and complexities that the\npoint you were trying to make was lost on the average\nviewer. Our review of the analysis developed by Bob\nTeeter (see Tab A) shows that you scored most heavily\nin the first debate with your statements concerning\ntax cuts. The only thing that approached this\npositive response in the second debate was your\ncomments concerning the Mayaguez which came across\nas emotional, personal and in relatively simple,\neasily understandable terms.\n4. Draw conclusions. We recommend that you end each\nanswer/response with a conclusion which puts into\nperspective the subject matter just discussed and the\ndifferences between you and Carter. The people expect\nyou, as President, to demonstrate your leadership by\nstating simply what these complex issues mean. You\nshould give them the \"bottom line\". This is also an\nexcellent opportunity to put Carter on the defensive\nas he attempts to respond to your answers. By\nrepresenting his position in your conclusion, you\ntend to preempt his response by stating in advance\nthe points he is about to make and why they are wrong\nor misleading. (We will provide some specific\nexamples.)\nKEY POINTS (THEMES)\nAs indicated above, after responding succinctly to the question,\nyou should make the appropriate key points in order to \"score\"\nwith the targeted audience.\nWe have indicated that the two most important points (or themes)\nto make are that (1) you are for lower taxes for everyone and\n(2) under your leadership we will maintain peace.\nFORD LIBRARY\nPage 6\n(In addition to these two points, we are developing some\nsuggested responses to key issues.)\nNevertheless, it is not the substance of your answers and\nrebuttals that is going to \"win or lose\" the debate. What\ncounts is the message you communicate concerning your own\ncharacter, ability, and vision vis-a-vis Carter. Accordingly,\nI recommend that you spend as much time as possible over the\nnext two days going over your answers with two or three of your\nadvisers in a Q and A format.\nSUMMARY\nFor the above reasons we believe you can decisively win the\nlast debate if you:\nEmphasize the major themes of peace and tax\ncuts and mention other key \"themes\" we will\npresent to you.\nAppear relaxed and natural thereby conveying\nto the viewing public your personal qualities\nof strength, self-confidence, ability to deal\nwith people directly and forthrightly, and\ncompassion and understanding for peoples' problems.\nDeal with Mr. Carter by appearing clearly as the\nPresident, on the high road, who is not distracted\nby the challenger. You should occasionally, and\nsharply, put him in his place with a forceful\n(but not strident) rebuke at the appropriate time\ninvolving an issue of importance.\nDo not become defensive. Stress your record of\nachievement and talk about the future.\nFORD LIBRARY"
}