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 Haldeman RE: a Lou Harris poll focusing on Ted Kennedy. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/25/1971
From Colson to Higby RE: Pasztor's poor job handling the Republican National Committee's ethinc operation. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 6/17/1971
From Colson to Haldeman RE: a report on "Julie's" teaching assignment obtained by Jack Caulfield. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 6/14/1971
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26144689
label
WHSF: Contested, 4-27
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144689
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 4-27
description
This file contains:
From Colson to Haldeman RE: a Lou Harris poll focusing on Ted Kennedy. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/25/1971
From Colson to Higby RE: Pasztor's poor job handling the Republican National Committee's ethinc operation. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 6/17/1971
From Colson to Haldeman RE: a report on "Julie's" teaching assignment obtained by Jack Caulfield. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 6/14/1971
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144689
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1ad795c6d4fd439c
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
4
27
6/25/1971
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Haldeman RE: a Lou Harris
poll focusing on Ted Kennedy. 4 pgs.
4
27
6/17/1971
White House Staff
Memo
From Colson to Higby RE: Pasztor's poor
job handling the Republican National
Committee's ethinc operation. 1 pg.
4
27
6/14/1971
White House Staff
Memo
From Colson to Haldeman RE: a report on
"Julie's" teaching assignment obtained by
Jack Caulfield. 1 pg.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Page 1 of 1
June 25, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
SUBJECT:
Lou Harris Poll
Lou Harris has done an indepth analysis of Ted Kennedy which
will be the subject of several Harris columns over the next
several weeks, The analysis is based on an indepth survey of
1614 eligible voters conducted between June 9 and 15.
It is Harris' considered judgment that Ted Kennedy, if nomin-
ated, will lose the election in a most divisive campaign. Harris
says there is a very unusual phenomenon with respect to the
Kennedy candidacy poll that doesn't occur with any other
Democrat; he arouses bitter hostility or ardent support but
rarely any lukewarm reactions.
Eight statements were presented to interviewees. Both answers
and then indepth comments were analyzed. Therefore, part of
the following is statistical and part of It is Harris' editorial analysis
of the comments.
On the strong side, Kennedy comes out 68-20 positive on the
question of whether he is a good senator who works hard. Harris
feels that he would be hard to attack on the issues or on his record
in the Senate.
A second positive point is that he is considered by a 51-34 rating "one
of the few politidans willing to take courageous stands on issues that
are before the country". Harris points out that this is a two edged
sword. People may admire his courage in opposing the Washington
police during May Day, for example, but still vote against him.
2.
It does not mean they agree with him. The breakdown of this
category goes as follows:
Catholics
60-26
Blacks
77-8
Young
52-34
College Educated
41-47 (a surprise)
Independents
47-40
In the next category, Harris asked a loaded, but highly significant,
question: "One day, he should run for President, but he's not ready
for it now, II The public agreed 58-29. The interpretation is that he
is considered a Presidential candidate but is also considered immature
and not ready for the Presidency now.
And the most important question of all: "Does he have the personality
and leadership qualities a President should have 34% say yes,
51 say no. Significantly, he is weakest on this in the West (27 yes,
62 no), among college educated (23-64) and among Independents (28-56).
Among youth he is 36-48 (a real surprise). In the East 38-46; Mid-West
38-47; South 31-52; among Catholics 43-42 and among WASP's 26-59.
Harris believes from analysing the comments and the raw numbers that
this is where Kennedy may be fatally vulnerable. A majority of the
people do not believe that he has the necessary qualities of leadership
to be President. (A very strong contrast can be drawn with the President).
In response to the question as to whether he has gotten where he is
because of his name, 57 agree and 35 disagree.
On the question of whether he is in the same league as his brothers,
48 agree 37 disagree.
In response to the question, "Although he denies it, he is really trying
to get the nomination", 44 agree 31 disagree.
Now, the shocker: "Because of what happened at Chappaquiddick, he
does not deserve the Presidency". 33 agree, 51 disagree. The breakdown
is:
Catholics
21-65
Blacks
12-69
WASP's
43-31
Republicans
50-34
Independents
32-51
Union Members
29-57
Democrats
26-60
This is, of course, a loaded question deliberately designed to find
out the "hard eore" of people who would vote against Kennedy because
of Chappaquiddick. In other words, this question tells that one out of
three people and most importantly one in four Democrats believe
Chappaquiddick alone disqualifies him. On men and women, the
break is about the same except women over 50 seemed to be much
stronger on this issue.
Harris' analysis of Kennedy's candidacy obviously should be discounted
because he is trying so desperately to please us. He is convinced
today that Kennedy cannot be elected, that in a two-way race right
now, we would beat him (those figures have not yet been collated)
and that in the heat of a campaign his candidacy would generate bitter
antagonisms and divide the country, which would cause him to lose
ground.
Teddy's strength is in the East and upper mid-West. He is very weak
in the South and West. He is strong among Catholics and union members
(71% of union members are Catholics and it should be noted). So there
is considerable overlap. Harris believes that the religion issue is still
latently there; that it is different than 1960, but is still very much a
factor.
Harris says that Muskie is dropping somewhat and his basic support
is very soft. Humphrey was coming on strong, but Harris' personal
opinion is that the revelation of the Kennedy-Johnson papers will kill
him and that the next poll will reflect this.
One very surprising conclusion is that Kennedy is not as strong with
the young as had been expected and Harris urges that we do not give
up on the youth particularly if the war ends well before the next election.
Harris tells me that the gossip among his Democratic friends is that
it's now a Muskie-Kennedy race, but Jackson is getting no grass roots
appeal and that the McGoverns and Bayhs are out of it. He also says
that McGovera is clearly a Kennedy "front" and that without any question,
Kennedy's people are maneuvering him for the race. Harris feels that
the liberal left will give Kennedy an edge over Muskie, particularly in
view of the nature of the delegates to the convention.
4.
At the moment, in Harris' opinion, Muskie is a more viable opponent
than Kennedy, although Harris feels that if the economic issue shows
any upturn at all we'll beat either one of them. He believes that if
the economic upturn does not take place, we would still beat Kennedy,
for the reasons that the negatives are so strong that he simply cannot
command a majority.
As an aside, Harris believes that the economy has in fact turned up
but that the public today is more negative on the economy than it has
been in the last 18 months. He points out that historically, public
confidence in the economy lage behind the actual recovery by 6 months.
He said that this is precisely what happened in England. The economy
had recovered and Wilson timed the election for the economic recovery.
Theppublic attitudes hadn't yet caught up with the facts. If the election
had been 2 months later Harris believes Wilson would have been
re-elected (he may be just justifying his and Gallup's failure to call
it right).
One final point, Harris offers the advise that in a campaign against
Teddy, we should project a moderate, calm Nixon against the flaming,
hot, devisive Teddy. Teddy should be made to appear strident and
immature, lacking in leadership qualities. This is where we must
exploit his vulnerability, but not slash back at him. We must rise
above him. Harris believesthat the doubters will swing to us in large
numbers near the end of the campaign, that the doubtful vote rarely
goes in large numbers to a candidate who engenders the kind of
strong negatives that Kennedy does. Against Muskie we would have
a very different situation. His blandness makes it difficult to draw
the kind of contrast we could draw with Kennedy.
I know you don't trust Harris; nor do I. I do think he is a better pollster
than some of us give him credit for, however, and I am also firmely
convinced that he wants desperately to weasel his way in with us and
that he honestly, for whatever motive, wants to see us re-elected.
June 17, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
SUBJECT:
Attached memo from Lyn Nofziger
My fuse is shortening (ast -- all we are trying to get Passtor to do
is the job he ought to be doing or else the RNC ethnic operation should
be folded up. How do you like this answer? I obviously have been
under the mistaken assumption that we are working in the same party.
TO BE AN
A: RATIVE MARKING
E.V. 12005, Section 6-102
By yew NARS, Date 2/04/12
June 14, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
SUBJECT:
Julie's Teaching Assignment Report
Attached is the report on the source of the attack on Julie's
new teaching assignment which Jack Caulfield obtal ned.
Because of the fact that this involves the family I do not
wish to proceed further without your approval. My thought
is that 1 would make this report available to Van Shumway
for planting with a good investigative reporter -- perhaps
Clark Mollenhoff or someone else. We could get assurance
in advance that a good thorough discrediting job would be
performed on Robert Crowley. There seems to me, at
least, to be enough material here to make that possible.