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 RN RE: the presidential acceptance speech a the Republican National Convention. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/17/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: how to overcome obstacles to re-election in the closing weeks of the campaign. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/9/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: how to overcome obstacles to re-election in the closing weeks of the campaign. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/9/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: the campaign's focus on the Vietnam War and unemployment. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/6/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: the campaign's focus on the Vietnam War and unemployment. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/6/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26144265
label
WHSF: Contested, 1-36
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144265
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 1-36
description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to RN RE: the presidential acceptance speech a the Republican National Convention. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/17/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: how to overcome obstacles to re-election in the closing weeks of the campaign. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/9/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: how to overcome obstacles to re-election in the closing weeks of the campaign. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/9/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: the campaign's focus on the Vietnam War and unemployment. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/6/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: the campaign's focus on the Vietnam War and unemployment. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/6/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144265
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
d04f17ef10638ae4
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
1
36
8/17/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: the presidential
acceptance speech a the Republican National
Convention. Handwritten notes added by
unknown. 2 pgs.
1
36
10/9/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: how to overcome
obstacles to re-election in the closing weeks
of the campaign. 3 pgs.
1
36
10/9/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: how to overcome
obstacles to re-election in the closing weeks
of the campaign. 3 pgs.
1
36
8/6/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: the campaign's
focus on the Vietnam War and
unemployment. 2 pgs.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Page 1 of 2
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
1
36
8/6/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: the campaign's
focus on the Vietnam War and
unemployment. 2 pgs.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Page 2 of 2
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 17, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
(Per L. Higby)
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
The President's acceptance speech should be directed to the whole
nation of course, but politically to the voters between RN's rock
bottom 40 percent, and his top of 65 percent. That 25 percent of the
electorate is our target. It is: not Republican at all; Independent
and Democratic, conservative socially, moderate politically; middle
income, working income economically; Northern Catholic and ethnic
largely but Southern Protestant also; in addition, there are several
million young people who are largely apolitical, one would guess --
they are probably not the brightest or best students; they are more
likely from Ohio State, SMU, Notre Dame, NYU, tha n from Harvard
and Yale.
This is the segment of the population which is the "swing vote" this
fall, where the opportunity is great, where our appeal can and should
be made -- without alienation of the 40 percent base, which is
essentially Conservative and Republican.
STRUCTURE
The speech in my view, should be essentially of three parts:
1.
What the President has accomplished. Foreign policy, Vietnam
should dominate here, but the Supreme Court, the efforts against
crime and pollution, the new approach to the cities, etc., can all be
included.
The purpose of this section simply would be to remind the voters of
tremendous accomplishment's of RN, and to set the stage, for the last
crucial part of the speech which deals with RN's Vision of where we
should be going. Would argue that RN detail briefly and toughly what
was the situation inthe nation when we took over the helm in 1968 --
what was it at home; what was it abroad and how all that has changed
dramatically.
-2-
2.
The middle part of the speech should strongly contrast the
President's positions and views with those of McGovern on Defense,
Amnesty, Permissiveness, Welfare, Foreign Policy, Isolationism,
Taxes, and Spending. We should draw McGovern's position without
naming here in stark terms on one side and RN's views on anothe r.
This should be interspersed with the strong political material, making
clear they are dreadfully wrong in their approach and options, and we
should be fairly tough here.
3.
The third section is the Vision, RN's view of where we are going
if you choose to join us. My view is that this section goes into two
parts -- the evils we will continue to halt, and combat, in the society
but mor important the concrete dream of what we and our gathering here
intend to do. We are to be the instrument of a new elite or a new order
in American society, where the sons and daughters of workingmen and
middle class are going to assume the helm of the nation, at every level
from that elite which has dominated so long.
We should portray the President and his people as the instrument who
are pushing open the door not to affluence for these people -- they are
fairly well off, but to leadership, to bringing in to Government the
successor generation to the New Deal types who did their thing, but who
now must give way as the Hoover business types did. We should be
concrete here.
And what are the accomplishments of this new generation of leaders to be:
The ending of the agony in Vietnam, the building of a new enduring structure
of international relations that can preserve for our children the peace
this generation of war veterans has never known. The remaking of
American society so that not just the sons of Harvard and Yale, but of
SMU, Notre Dame, of NYU and Whittier move into the decision-making
positions in American life. They chart the destiny of the nation,
grads
henceforth. The President is the John the Baptist of a new leadership
emerging in all aspects of national life. The Old Establishment must
many
give way to these new blood, new men, with new ideas and old values.
At home, their jobs are to preserve and protect the environment that
has been destroyed, to provide new guarantees for the rights of the
victims in society. In any event, this will be spelled out in much more
detail in subsequent memoranda and paragraphs. These will be
old
coming up today and tomorrow.
Buchanan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 9, 1972
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
With four weeks to go the political situation seems to have stabilized.
With McGovern not moving as dramatically as necessary; indeed hardly
moving at all, according to Harris.
The following are what I see as potential problem areas for us politically,
which could cause a rapid dissipation of the present lead.
1)
Sam Ervin & the Watergate. Should a Congressional hearing be
called the focus of the campaign could be turned off of the "negatives" of
McGovern onto our "negatives. 11 Given the present disposition of the
national media -- the major domos are disappointed in the lack of a contest
and enraged and frustrated by RN's above-the-battle tactics -- the hearings
would be the most celebrated since Army-McCarthy.
2)
The McGovern anti-Nixon Commercials. McGovern's people
seem finallyto have come to the conclusion that their best hope lies not SO
much in resurrecting their candidate's image they don't have the time
but in tearing down our man. My guess is that they will be extremely rough,
and if they are not overdone, fairly effective.
My personal view is that we ought to, now, go on a crash program for some
more anti-McGovern commericals to keep in stock.
Beyond that, the latest poll is certain to put pressure on McGovern; and
given the fact that his three most sensitive points seem to be Vietnam,
(he is proud of his "consistency) Eagleton and "credibility, " maybe we ought
to begin moving, with some of our surrogates, in a more direct way.
If we can get him talking and arguing about these -- we do well. Frankly,
I would like to see the entire Eagleton business, which is such a loser for
McGovern, e-elevated by some of our people.
-2-
to the commercials momentarily -- HHH's anti-Nixon commercials
brutal in my judgment, but effective and we should expect that
vern's will go after the "scandal", "corrupt" issues and if they
mart they will not use their principal, McGovern, as they have
akenly in the past, to act as the Prosecutor.
A sharp McGovern movement upward in the polls could conceivably
;e a reverse leverage on the "analyses" and "polls" and "local statements"
ch are right now so damaging to him. Every time a newspaper or survey
S out they come in with startling negative returns for McGovern. And
:ry time a local pol speaks off the record it seems, he raps George.
is has to hurt in community after community if McGovern starts up,
wever, this will reverse and one will find poll after poll saying "McGovern
bsing the gap. 11 While the possibility recedes with each week, the
ssibility remains of the "comeback" theme catching with the press and
ablic.
)
The apathetic electorate and the low turnout. Though the liberal
ress has egg on its face now, for its earlier discussion of aroused and
alienated electorate looking for McGovern's kind of politics, there seems to
be some truth in the possibility of a low turnout, over-confident Republicans,
and a McGovern-hard-core maximizing his vote, while we minimize ours.
We ought to be giving this problem serious consideration -- although I do
not believe it at all calls for RN to hit the stump at this point in time.
5)
The media hostility. One has to have seen Agronsky & Co. to
visualize it. Since the Broder column there has been piece after piece,
taking up the theme that RN has "outwitted" the press, that he is using the
enormous resources of the White House to such effect that it is no contest;
that McGovern is at an unfair disadvantage; that the President is ignoring the
i ssues, playing above-the-battle, refusing to "engage" in campaign debate,
even by long distance, and to top it all -- appears headed for a landslide
which the press can do nothing about. If one took a poll of the press corps,
I would guess that ninety-five to one hundred percent want to see the gap
closed.
Recognizing that they are negatively disposed to our campaign at this point,
and anxious to leap on any embarrassment perhaps we should give
consideration to an offensive media strategy to feed the animals, SO they
aren't chewing on us the rest of the campaign.
Dont' know what we have of substance coming down the pike but the more
of that the better. One notes that RN's Texas visit which had some substan,
to it was played extremely well and the NY to LA jaunt was played equal]
badly. We should be thinking of something to give these fellows to write an
talk about rather than bemoaning our "lack" of a campaign.
-3-
THOUGHTS & SUGGESTIONS:
A)
We ought to have adopted in advance a strategy for the McGove
ads, whether to ignore them or attack them as "smear" -- hopefully
they will be SO bad that they will indict themselves. But it would be seriou
for us, I think, if McGovern's ads succeeded in moving the focus off of
McGovern's screw-ups and incompetence and his radicalism -- which shou
be the last four weeks of this campaign.
B)
We should be planning now not locking in, however some
election eve, Saturday, Sunday, Monday type drills, which are certain to
C reate massive national interest and participation in the election -- by our
folks. We do need to have our troops excited more out there -- they do neec
to get stirred up -- and given the Presidential podium, one can get the
national attention with relative ease.
C)
In two weeks or perhaps three, the time may be ripe to be calling
not for a mandate for RN but for a repudiation of McGovern by Democrats.
On these grounds, we should move out the line that the McGovernites have
given up; they are interested only in a large vote to control the party
machinery -- and a Connally and Meany and Fitzsimmons and other Democrat.
can all call for a national "repudiation of extremism" so that the Great
Democratic Party can be restored to its rightful owners, the American
people. Cast a Vote Against Extremism kind of theme -- something that
will convince Democrats that if McGovern even comes close their party is
gone from them forever.
D)
If we can contain McGovern for twenty more days even, or two
more weeks, assuredly there is a fail-safe point at which local Democrats
have to jump off and start pushing out their split-ticket sample ballots; with
sort of an every-man-for-himself philosophy taking over. That almost
but did not happen with Humphrey as the unions never deserted him.
But if McGovern is hanging where he was last two or three weeks from
now it could startwith him.
E)
The President should stay out of the attack business altogether,
as of now. This still looks good. Also, the President of all the People,
standing up for America, is something disgruntled and even anti-Nixon
Democrats can vote for if the rest of us can keep McGovern painted as
an incompetent and opportunistic radical -- who would do or say anything
to win. With McGovern's recent horrible charges he has diminished the
possibility of his becoming a sympathetic figure, a martyr, which leaves
us some room for toughening the attacks on him.
Buchanan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 9, 1972
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
With four weeks to go the political situation seems to have stabilized.
With McGovern not moving as dramatically as necessary; indeed hardly
moving at all, according to Harris.
The following are what I see as potential problem areas for us politically,
which could cause a rapid dissipation of the present lead.
1)
Sam Ervin & the Watergate. Should a Congressional hearing be
called the focus of the campaign could be turned off of the "negatives" of
McGovern onto our "negatives. 11 Given the present disposition of the
national media the major domos are disappointed in the lack of a contest
and enraged and frustrated by RN's above-the-battle tactics -- the hearings
would be the most celebrated since Army-McCarthy.
2)
The McGovern anti-Nixon Commercials. McGovern's people
seem finallyto have come to the conclusion that their best hope lies not SO
much in resurrecting their candidate's image -- they don't have the time --
but in tearing down our man. My guess is that they will be extremely rough,
and if they are not overdone, fairly effective.
My personal view is that we ought to, now, go on a crash program for some
more anti-McGovern commericals to keep in stock.
Beyond that, the latest poll is certain to put pressure on McGovern; and
given the fact that his three most sensitive points seem to be Vietnam,
(he is proud of his "consistency) Eagleton and "credibility," maybe we ought
to begin moving, with some of our surrogates, in a more direct way.
If we can get him talking and arguing about these we do well. Frankly,
I would like to see the entire Eagleton business, which is such a loser for
McGovern, re-elevated by some of our people.
-2-
Back to the commercials momentarily HHH's anti-Nixon commercials
were brutal in my judgment, but effective and we should expect that
McGovern's will go after the "scandal", "corrupt" issues and if they
are smart they will not use their principal, McGovern, as they have
mistakenly in the past, to act as the Prosecutor.
3)
A sharp McGovern movem. at upward in the polls could conceivably
cause a reverse leverage on the "analyses" and "polls" and "local statements"
which are right now SO damaging to him. Every time a newspaper or survey
goes out they come in with startling negative returns for McGovern. And
every time a local pol speaks off the record it seems, he raps George.
This has to hurt in community after community if McGovern starts up,
however, this will reverse and one will find poll after poll saying "McGovern
closing the gap. 11 While the possibility recedes with each week, the
possibility remains of the "comeback" theme catching with the press and
public.
4)
The apathetic electorate and the low turnout. Though the liberal
press has egg on its face now, for its earlier discussion of aroused and
alienated electorate looking for McGovern's kind of politics, there seems to
be some truth in the possibility of a low turnout, over-confident Republicans,
and a McGovern-hard-core maximizing his vote, while we minimize ours.
We ought to be giving this problem serious consideration although I do
not believe it at all calls for RN to hit the stump at this point in time.
5)
The media hostility. One has to have seen Agronsky & Co. to
visualize it. Since the Broder column there has been piece after piece,
taking up the theme that RN has "outwitted" the press, that he is using the
enormous resources of the White House to such effect that it is no contest;
that McGovern is at an unfair disadvantage; that the President is ignoring the
i ssues, playing above-the-battle, refusing to "engage" in campaign debate,
even by long distance, and to top it all appears headed for a landslide
which the press can do nothing about. If one took a poll of the press corps,
I would guess that ninety-five to one hundred percent want to see the gap
closed.
Recognizing that they are negatively disposed to our campaign at this point,
and anxious to leap on any embarrassment perhaps we should give
consideration to an offensive media strategy to feed the animals, SO they
aren't chewing on us the rest of the campaign.
Dont' know what we have of substance coming down the pike but the more
of that the better. One notes that RN's Texas visit which had some substance
to it was played extremely well and the NY to LA jaunt was played equally
badly. We should be thinking of something to give these fellows to write and
talk about rather than bemoaning our "lack" of a campaign.
-3-
THOUGHTS & SUGGESTIONS:
A)
We ought to have adopted in advance a strategy for the McGovern
ads, whether to ignore them or attack them as "smear" hopefully
they will be so bad that they will indict themselves. But it would be serious
for us, I think, if McGovern's ads succeeded in moving the focus off of
McGovern's screw-ups and incompetence and his radicalism which should
be the last four weeks of this campaign.
B)
We should be planning now -- not locking in, however -- some
election eve, Saturday, Sunday, Monday type drills, which are certain to
C reate massive national interest and participation in the election -- by our
folks. We do need to have our troops excited more out there they do need
to get stirred up -- and given the Presidential podium, one can get the
national attention with relative ease.
C)
In two weeks or perhaps three, the time may be ripe to be calling
not for a mandate for RN -- but for a repudiation of McGovern by Democrats.
On thes grounds, we should move out the line that the McGovernites have
given up; they are interested only in a large vote to control the party
machinery -- and a Connally and Meany and Fitzsimmons and other Democrats
can all call for a national "repudiation of extremism" SO that the Great
Democratic Party can be restored to its rightful owners, the American
people. Cast a Vote Against Extremism kind of theme -- something that
will convince Democrats that if McGovern even comes close their party is
gone from them forever.
D)
If we can contain McGovern for twenty more days even, or two
more weeks, assuredly there is a fail-safe point at which local Democrats
have to jump off and start pushing out their split-ticket sample ballots; with
sort of an every-man-for-himself philosophy taking over. That almost
but did not happen with Humphrey -- as the unions never deserted him.
But if McGovern is hanging where he was last -- two or three weeks from
now it could startwith him.
E)
The President should stay out of the attack business altogether,
as of now. This still looks good. Also, the President of all the People,
standing up for America, is something disgruntled and even anti-Nixon
Democrats can vote for if the rest of us can keep McGovern painted as
an incompetent and opportunistic radical who would do or say anything
to win. With McGovern's recent horrible charges he has diminished the
possibility of his becoming a sympathetic figure, a martyr, which leaves
us some room for toughening the attacks on him.
Buchanan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 6, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT (Per HRH As Requested)
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
Have received the poll briefing and while the findings on the issue
are unexceptional, the conclusions that are drawn are wrong, I
think -- if I do not mistake them. Our surrogates and the Vice
President should not spend a disproportionate amount of their
time defending our record on unemployment, and economic
management. By most everyone's judgment, our record is not
considered as that good; this is our "weakest" point - and a
national debate over whether we managed the economy well is
perhaps the one debate with McGovern we can lose.
Agreed that Vietnam, inflation, etc. are the crucial issues. We
can win on these issues by not SO much verbally defending our reocrd,
but by portraying McGovern as disasterous to the stock market,
disasterous to the job market with his budget cuts in defense and
space, disasterous to the security of the U.S., disasterous to the
price situation, because of his $1000 program, or his $6500 welfare
giveaway. In short, let's not SO much defend our record, which is
subject to criticism, as to attack McGovern with being a clear and
present danger to the prosperity we now have.
The point is this: If the Democrats had nominated Harpo Marx, the
Teeter poll would have said Vietnam, economy, inflation are the
major issues. Would we, in a race with Harpo, talk about those
issues -- or would the winning issues rather be the manifest lack
of qualification of their candidate -- despite our record.
The decision in November and our rhetoric must not focus upon
their issues -- i. e., "unemployment" and the unequal economic
record of the last four years -- it must focus upon our issues
i. c., the extremism, elitism, radicalism, kookism, of McGovern's
person, campaign, and programs, against the solid, strong,
effective leadership of the President. The first campaign described
above is the only way we can lose in 1972 -- and if I am not mistaken
-2-
this is something close to what the Teeter folks recommend, when
they say we ought to talk up the economy, and spend an inordinate
amount of time defending our record on unemployment.
Nor should we forget the capacity of a candidate (i. e., Kennedy
and the "missile gap, 11 Goldwater and "extremism") to create
issues, on which elections turn, sometimes legitimate issues,
sometimes illegitimate. When we portray McGovern's ideas as
preposterous, foolish, and even dangerous to U.S. security and
the nation's economy, we are right now pushing against an open door --
with the media at large, as well as the country.
The campaign should turn, we should make it turn, upon the manifest
unqualification of this character and his ilk to even be in the
Presidential contest -- not whether a damn referendum in our spotty
economic performance, which talking, talking, talking about the
economy and jobs, and unemployment would make it. So, I disagree
strongly with what I view as the central thrust of recommendations
of the Teeter polls.
Buchanan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 6, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT (Per HRH As Requested)
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
Have received the poll briefing and while the findings on the issue
are unexceptional, the conclusions that are drawn are wrong, I
think -- if I do not mistake them. Our surrogates and the Vice
President should not spend a disproportionate amount of their
time defending our record on unemployment, and economic
management. By most everyone's judgment, our record is not
considered as that good; this is our "weakest" point -- and a
national debate over whether we managed the economy well is
perhaps the one debate with McGovern we can lose.
Agreed that Vietnam, inflation, etc. are the crucial issues. We
can win on these issues by not so much verbally defending our reocrd,
but by portraying McGovern as disasterous to the stock market,
disasterous to the job market with his budget cuts in defense and
space, disasterous to the security of the U.S., disasterous to the
price situation, because of his $1000 program, or his $6500 welfare
giveaway. In short, let's not so much defend our record, which is
subject to criticism, as to attack McGovern with being a clear and
present danger to the prosperity we now have.
The point is this: If the Democrats had nominated Harpo Marx, the
Teeter poll would have said Vietnam, economy, inflation are the
major issues. Would we, in a race with Harpo, talk about those
issues -- or would the winning issues rather be the manifest lack
of qualification of their candidate -- despite our record.
The decision in November and our rhetoric must not focus upon
their issues -- i. e., "unemployment" and the unequal economic
record of the last four years -- it must focus upon our issues --
i.e., the extremism, elitism, radicalism, kookism, of McGovern's
person, campaign, and programs, against the solid, strong,
effective leadership of the President. The first campaign described
above is the only way we can lose in 1972 -- and if I am not mistaken,
-2-
this is something close to what the Teeter folks recommend, when
they say we ought to talk up the economy, and spend an inordinate
amount of time defending our record on unemployment.
Nor should we forget the capacity of a candidate (i. e., Kennedy
and the "missile gap, 11 Goldwater and "extremism") to create
issues, on which elections turn, sometimes legitimate issues,
sometimes illegitimate. When we portray McGovern's ideas as
preposterous, foolish, and even dangerous to U.S. security and
the nation's economy, we are right now pushing against an open door - -
with the media at large, as well as the country.
The campaign should turn, we should make it turn, upon the manifest
unqualification of this character and his ilk to even be in the
Presidential contest -- not whether a damn referendum in our spotty
economic performance, which talking, talking, talking about the
economy and jobs, and unemployment would make it. So, I disagree
strongly with what I view as the central thrust of recommendations
of the Teeter polls.
Buchanan