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 Colson to RN RE: Broder's thoughts on society's views of the government and how to combat these ideas. 1 pg. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 10/26/1970
Colson's in-depth analysis of Broder's ideas for RN, including strategies on how to combat widespread apathy toward the government. 6 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 10/26/1970
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26144585
label
WHSF: Contested, 3-51
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144585
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 3-51
description
This file contains:
From Colson to RN RE: Broder's thoughts on society's views of the government and how to combat these ideas. 1 pg. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 10/26/1970
Colson's in-depth analysis of Broder's ideas for RN, including strategies on how to combat widespread apathy toward the government. 6 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 10/26/1970
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144585
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
5b4f2e7bbed94d95
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
3
51
10/26/1970
Domestic Policy
Memo
From Colson to RN RE: Broder's thoughts on
society's views of the government and how to
combat these ideas. 1 pg.
3
51
10/26/1970
Domestic Policy
Memo
Colson's in-depth analysis of Broder's ideas
for RN, including strategies on how to
combat widespread apathy toward the
government. 6 pgs.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Page 1 of 1
October 26, 1970
SUMMARY OF MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Broder argues that there is wide spread fear and apprehension over
the future -- the economy, youth, lawlessness. Many people have
lost confidence in Government. There is a vacuum of leadership,
great indecision about 1972, party loyalties are deteriorating and
people are disenchanted with our national leaders.
Broder's conclusions tend to be supported by the feelings of many poll-
sters that there is a large undecided, probably apathetic, group in this
year's elections.
Broder's conclusion, in my opinion, apply only to a segment of the
voting population, mainly middle class, allace oriented, dissatisfied
and troubled people who are especially apprehensive about the economy.
His conclusions cannot be generalized.
What we should do:
1. Not only attack permissivism in society but prove how much we are
doing about it on a positive basis. Demonstrate that we can effectively
solve problems; that we are cutting crime, curbing drugs and restoring
order to our campuses.
2. If possible, accelerate our economic game plan and develop a positive
psychology about the future of the economy.
3. Emphasize reform, revenue sharing and restoration of power to state
and local governments. V. e must prove that Government can function.
4. Maintain the President's image as a tough, courageous, masculine
leader.
Conclusion: Broder has provided an exagerated diagnosis of the disen-
chanted alienated segment of the population. It, nonetheless, may be the
swing vote in the next Clection. Thus, it is politically imperative that we
attempt to allay their fears and build confidence.
Charles T. Colson
October 26, 1970
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Analysis of Broder Series
Broder's basic points are:
1. People are fearful and apprehensive over the future. They are
mostly concerned (a) about what the future holds for their children,
(b) the future of the economy, and (c) drugs, violence and lawless-
ness.
2. Many people have concluded that Government is incapable of handling
the nation's problems: the feeling that no one can solve the great
problems of the day creates frustration and, hence, disdain for
Government and politicians.
3. There is a vacuum of Leadership and a "negative, tentative" approval
of you. You are dolay as well as you can and peonle have concluded
there is no better alternative; none of the national Democrats do any
better in inspiring considence. This accounts for what Broder calls
a "Nobody for President" attitude.
4. There is great indecision about 1972. There is not yet an "emerging
new majority." There is no clear cut pattern developing along ideolog-
ical or party lines. Party loyalties are deteriorating.
5. Agnew, Wallace and Kennedy are too controversial to be President
(for different reasons). People do not want a leader who scares them.
6. The people want leadership -- someone who will speak for and unify
the whole country.
In analyzing Broder's conclusions, it is important to note that he inter-
viewed only 200 people. All pollsters agree that in-depth interviews
with any small sampling pormits the interviewer to reinforce his own
preconceived notions. Broder was undoubtedly trying to be objective
but I believe that he has greatly exaggerated a number of points.
In preparing the series Broder worked closely with Dick Scammon
(the social issue) and would naturally tend to be influenced by the
Scammon thesis. Broder also concentrated on that portion of the
population which he believes to represent the independent swing vote.
He acknowledged that he spent little time with black or Jewish voters
(who would tend to take a clearly liberal position) or with businessmen
(who would tend to be with us). One in five of those interviewed were
Wallace voters in 1968; they would tend to be the most disturbed, dis-
satisfied and negative. In short, therefore, I think that some of
Broder's conclusions may be valid as to a segment of the voting
population but his conclusions cannot be generalized or applied
across the board. There is a disturbed element in society but the
whole country is not racked with fear as Broder would suggest.
Every pollster in the country reports an unusually large undecided
vote in next week's election -- in many cases a quarter of the popu-
lation. The prevailing thosis is that this quarter of the population is
apathetic, disinterested in the election, sees no choice between the
parties, and is generally frustrated, having lost faith in Government's
ability to solve their problems. In studying the comments of Broder's
interviewees it is my opinion that Eb is talking mostly with people in
this category, nerceiter referred to, for lack of a better term, as
the "alienated voter."
The following is my point by point analysis:
1. Fear and concern about the future. Broder is correct there is
a politically vointile Bayment of the pormition that is very appre-
hensive about the inture. The alienated voter is concerned about
all of the things that we reflect concern about drugs, pornography,
lawlessness, student unrest but 33 doesn't believe anything can
be done about it. To are clearly on the right side of the issue but,
as to this voter at least, we have not gained his confidence that we
can solve the problem.
In the first two years by emphasizing the law and order issue, we
have kept people aroused about student militants, drugs, pornography,
etc. We have also effectively associated the liberals with all that is
bad about Derminsivences in society. As a result, we have succeeded
in splitting voters away from the Liberal Democrats.
-3-
To win them over, we must do more. We cannot simply continue
to decry permissivism and social evils; in the second two years
we are very likely to inherit the responsibility for their continu-
ation. Proving that we can do something about the evils that we
and the alienated voter are against must be our highest priority
political objective. We must start to build and advertise a posi-
tive record of (a) restoring order on campus, (b) cutting crime,
(c) curbing drugs and (d) generally rebuilding the moral foundation
of our society. People want to believe that the future is safe, that
we can do something about the ills in society; witness the reaction
you get whenever you say that the vast majority of our children are
good and that the rock throwers are a small majority.
Perhaps an even more socially unsettling factor than law and order
is concern over the future of the economy . unemployment and the
cost of living. This concern permeates all of Broder's interviews
and is high on every poilster's issue list. People have always
equated "good times with prosperity. Fear of recession or
depression greatly aliects the national mood and aggravates other
Coars, like the social issue. Many of the people Broder inter-
viewed are old enough to remember the "Great Depression."
As Broder boints out, the economic issue draws the alienated
voter to the Democrate even though at the same time the same
voter agrees with us on one law and order issue. Not only the
fact of economic health but restoring confidence in the economic
future is vital if we are to win the political allegiance of this
group. The early success of our economic game plan is critical.
2. Government is incarable of handling nation's problems. This may be
the most scrious voing in the Droder articles. The Intest Darris
Poll shows that 27% of the people interviewed say that you are
"doing the hest job you can." Marris says that further in-depth
questioning reveals that this answer most often reflects a belief
that no President can solve the country's problems and that Govern-
ment is no longer workable or manageable. it is an answer which
reflects frustration. Significantly, this percentage was also high
during the Johnson Administration (hitting a top figure of 35% in
1968).
This may also be the source of much of this year's apathy, i.e., it
really doesn't matter who wins. This attitude creates what Broder
calls "the lendership vacuum", i.e., the job 18 too tough for anyone
to health.
The alienated voter is the most politically volatile, the most
negative and, hence, the most likely to vote against the "ins"
or not vote at all. These are not the radical students who believe
that our society is degenerate and our system of Government
unresponsive; these are middle Americans who simply feel that
Government cannot do anything about the problems of our society.
We must, therefore, restore people's faith in our ability to manage
Government and Government's ability to solve problems. We
should emphasize over and over the "reform" theme, dramatize
how we have gotten Government and the bureaucracy under control,
and push very hard for revenue sharing and return of power to the
states and communities. We have a better record in this area
than any of our predecessors but we need to do a better job of
selling it. We also must do more to tighten up management (getting
rid of programs that people know are ineffective and wasteful.)
3. Leadership vacuum. The so-called leadership vacuum or the
"tentative, nogative emproval" of you issimply a consequence of the
alionated voter's frustration, and his fear over the economy and
Inwiessness. ANY point is that this attitude prevails only in this
particular group. inc proof of this is that in his interviews Broder
discovers that this same group, watch is infilierent to you, is
equally indifferent towards any other national leader. Therefore,
it is not VOID londership that they reject: their frustration causes
them to lose faith in coverate lendership. It is perfectly obvious
from the стомп you have turned out across the country and their
reaction that there is real enthusiosm for you and your Presidency.
I believe that the majority of the peoble do i-iontify you as a strong,
forceful leader, one Visao doesn't promise things that can't be done,
one who has caimly and quietly tried to cope with the very serious
problems our nation faces.
In a meeting with Pete Brennan last week, he explained the reason
for the "hard hat" support of you more perceptively than I think we
have analyzed it. He said that the "hard hats" wave the tlag and
cheer the President but that, in and of itself, does not translate
into votes. Noreover, most of the "hard hats" don't like our
economic policies and Zeel that we are pushing them too hard in
the civil rights area. What is winning their political loyalty is
their admination for your masculitity. The "hard hats", who are
a tough breed, have come to respect you 25 a tough, courageous
mails run. Drennin's thesis is that this image of you will win
the VOUS intro W 3 The harge of Leing
-5-
strong, forceful and decisive will have a powerful personal appeal
with the alienated voter.
4. Indecision about 1972; diminishing party loyalties. The alienated
voter, by definition, has lost his party loyalty. Ideologically he
is pulled towards us on the law and order issue and away from us
on the economic issue. By definition, he is disenchanted with
Government; therefore, disenchanted with politicians and political
parties. To the extent that traditional party loyalties have been
broken, we have an opportunity to win over large blocks of voters
(like Wallace Democrats). We should not be trying to make them
Republicans, rather we should be trying to win their confidence
and allay their fears.
5. Agnew, Kennedy and V allace are too controversial to be President.
This is also a logical extension of Broder's other points. People
who are frustrated and concerned and who have lost faith are least
likely to turn to a teader who frightens them. It is significant that
Mennedy's Chappacuidic incident is still very much in the public
mind, at least in this group (this reinforces Brennan's point that
perble want a ism Leoner with strong character.) The Agnew
point is important. People identify with Agriew because he says
the things they are thinking but they are afraid that a man who
speaks out and says the things they are thinking in not responsible
chough to be a good President. It is a paradox that because they
identify with him, they believe that their own faults and weaknesses
are reflected in him.
The most significant point is the erosion of the Wallace strength.
The alienaabivoter can express his frustrations by voting for
Wallace -- and did in 1963. Broder points out, however, that
significant numbers of former Wallace voters have now concluded
either that he is too donverous to be President or that a vote for
Wallace is a wasted one. This should be an opportunity for us.
6. People want londorahip and a unliving Influence. This is really
amother restatement 01 Line frustrations or this segment of the
population. Restoring their confidence in the future in the ways
described above is the key.
Conclusion: The Broder series must be read in context. His con-
clusions cannot be generalized for the whole country. In my opinion,
the restless, frustrated and fearful voter group is no larger than 15%
to 20% of the country. This may well, however, be the swing vote in
1972.
Our target is obviously to win their confidence and allay their fears by
proving that we can do something about what they worry about most --
the economy, the lack of future for their children, drugs and crime.
If we do, this group plus the solid constituency we now have will be an
unbeatable majority: if we do not succeed, at best they will be non-voters;
at the worst, they will vote against the "ins" merely as an expression of
protest.
Most importantly, these people need an up-lift. The theme of the Jaycees'
speech is one which should be hit over and over in the next two years.
We need to do the things and say the things that will restore the confi-
dence of the allenated voter.
Charles W. Colson