Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "26144841",
    "label": "WHSF: Contested, 5-59",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26144841"
}

{
    "id": "26144841",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26144841",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "WHSF: Contested, 5-59",
    "description": "This file contains:\n\nFrom Ehrlichman to Haldeman RE: Reelection Campaign. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/6/1971",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26144841",
    "collections": [
        "Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
        "Contested Materials Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/41/1448/26144841/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-5/Contested-05-59.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/41/1448/26144841/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-5/Contested-05-59.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/41/1448/26144841/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-5/Contested-05-59.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26144841",
    "naId": 26144841,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/41/1448/26144841/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-5/Contested-05-59.pdf",
    "mediaId": "9dba5f88aad74a31",
    "ocrText": "Richard Nixon Presidential Library\nContested Materials Collection\nFolder List\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n5\n59\n11/6/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Ehrlichman to Haldeman RE: Re-\nelection Campaign. 9 pgs.\nWednesday, December 17, 2014\nPage 1 of 1\nDOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT)\nDOCUMENT\nDOCUMENT\nNUMBER\nTYPE\nSUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS\nDATE\nRESTRICTION\nN-1\nNotes\nBeginning \"Edgar, as you can [11/2/71\nn.d.\n[DOC#169]\nC (Nixon)\ndictation ]\nN-2\nMemo\nEhrlichman to Haldeman Re: Reelection\n11/6/71\n((Nixon)\n[Dociti70]\ncampaign\nFILE GROUP TITLE\nBOX NUMBER\nWHSF: Ehrlichman\n58\nFOLDER TITLE\nChron. Files\n1 November 1971 19 December 1971\nRESTRICTION CODES\nA. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.\nE. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or\nB. National security classified information.\nfinancial information.\nC. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's\nF. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law\nrights.\nenforcement purposes.\nD. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy\nG. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.\nor a libel of a living person.\nH. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.\nNATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION\nNA FORM 1421 (4-85)\nDOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT)\nDOCUMENT\nDOCUMENT\nNUMBER\nTYPE\nSUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS\nDATE\nRESTRICTION\nN-1\nmemo\nHullin to Ehrlichman, ve:\n12/2/71\nC(Nixon)\n[DOC#17]]\n\"BIA Personnel Changes\"\nEhrlichman to RN, re: Memo to Muskie's\n\"\nN-2\nmemo\n14/1/21\n[DOC#172]\nCampaign Manager\"\nN-3\nmemo\nAnna Navarro DanLouis to\nGeorge Nitchell, Elliot Cutler\n11\n[006# # 172)\nI\nlattached to\"tbove)\nFILE GROUP TITLE\nBOX NUMBER\nEhrlichman Chron.\n58\nFOLDER TITLE\n\\ November 1971- 19 December 1971\nRESTRICTION CODES\nA. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.\nE. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or\n3. National security classified information.\nfinancial information.\n:. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's\nF. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law\nrights.\nenforcement purposes.\nRelease would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy\nG. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.\nor a libel of a living person.\nH. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.\nATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION\nNA FORM 1421 (4-85)\nPresidential Materials Review Board\nReview on Contested Documents\nCollection:\nJohn D. Ehrlichman\nBox Number:\n58\nFolder:\n1 November 1971-19 December 1971 [2 of 3]\nDocument\nDisposition\n169\nRetain Open\n170\nReturn Private/Political\n171\nRetain Close Invasion of Privacy\n172\nRetain\nOpen\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nNovember 6, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR\nBOB HALDEMAN\nRE:\nREELECTION CAMPAIGN\nThe tone or theme:\nIn spite of all the talk about this being an age of one-term\nPresidents, I believe it is very hard for the American people\nto turn out a sitting President. Therefore, obviously, the\ntone or theme of the campaign must be keyed to the fact that\nthe President is the President, that he has done a professional\nand competent job, that he has made significant accomplishments\nand that there is, therefore, no reason to change.\nI think people tend to vote against a candidate perhaps more\nfrequently than they vote for him; and certainly a Presidential\nrace always weighs a candidate against his opponent. An incumbent\nPresident has an obvious advantage and President Nixon has a very\nclear advantage in view of his international initiatives on the question\nof \"compared to what?\".\nAt the same time, the President is the national father figure, the\nexemplar, the leader, and the nation's champion against other\nnations. This is what the American people believe a President is\nand they want him to act out these parts. They want him to evidence\ncompassion for the poor, even though individually they may say\nand do things showing callous disregard for the poor. It is alright\nfor Mr. Voter to be indifferent to the poor but it is not alright, in\nhis eyes and mine, for his President to be indifferent to the poor. In\nfact, I suspect he gets a certain amount of psychic relieve from the\nknowledge that his President is being concerned about the less fortunate\neven at the time that he himself is not.\n-2-\nI think it is indispensable for the President to act out these\nroles in the course of the next year, with feeling and sincerity,\nto fulfill these expectations. To the extent that he does not we\nwill find vague discontents and negative reactions expressed as\n\"the President has no compassion, he doesn't care, he is cold\nand indifferent, he has no thought for the little people, he only\ncares about big business, etc.\"\nSince this is role-acting, let's approach it as such. The President\nhas a natural antipathy for doing the phony, the unnatural and the\nnot-felt. But we are now not talking about making him comfortable\nin what he is doing; we are talking about getting him reelected and,\nin looking at that project coldly, there are some things that are\ngoing to have to be done to do the job properly that he may not totally\nlike. But I am sure he and we would like the alternative even less.\nBecause I think the alternative is to give exposure to an Achilles\nheel to which the President may be attacked mercilessly and effectively\nwith unknown results.\nAnd like a tennis game, as long as you can return the ball without\nmistake every time it doesn't really matter how hard you hit it.\nYou keep playing for the other fe llow's mistake. We occupy the\nhigh ground now since the President is the incumbent and all he\nhas to do is go on being the incumbent. The other fellow has to\nfigure out how to take the high ground. Therefore, we should avoid\ngiving him handholds, avoid making mistakes, avoid acting rashly\nor without calculation or contemplation (e.g., the re-run of the\nPhoenix speech) and close as many of the doors as possible through\nwhich the enemy might enter.\nIn short, I would like to see the President put in situations which would\nact out his compassion, his fairness, his true concern for his inferiors,\nhis leadership, etc. It does almost no good at all for those of us who\nknow him well to tell about these things. One acting-out session will\nbe worth ten thousand interviews with White House staffers or members\nof the Cabinet.\n-3-\nThe President's part in the campaign\nWe had a good session with the Cabinet yesterday in the\nPresident's absence, and we told them all the things that they\nhad to do in order to get the President reelected. But I\nsuspect you know, and I strongly feel, that in the last analysis\nit isn't going to make much difference what the Cabinet says or\ndoes. The President himself is going to have to do much more\nthan he is inclined to do, much more than he would want to do\nand probably much more than his responsibilities in fact permit\nhim safely to do. But nevertheless I think he will have to do them.\nTelevision and Radio\nI know there is a concern that the President is over-exposing himself\non television. And yet the singular criticism which I hear as I go\naround the country talking the issues to people is that the President\nis not talking to them about the issues. The Cabinet is talking to them,\nthe staff is talking to them, Bob Dole is talking to them but they want\nthe President to talk to them. They want fireside chats. Over and over\nagain I receive the suggestion that the President sit down and talk to\nthe country about the issues of the time on a periodic basis, so that\nthey may count regularly on hearing from him not just at times of\ncrisis but under circumstances that will permit them to pull their\nchairs up to the television and listen to him explain to them about the\nproblems of our aged, health problems, the problems of our youth\nand our cities in terms which they can understand and react to.\nWe have discussed the fireside chat format in the past and I gather\nthat the ten o'clock meeting or the five o'clock meeting or the Saturday\nmorning group or somebody doesn't think it's a very good idea. All\nI know is that there is considerable consumer demand out there in the\nfield for this kind of thing.\nAs a variation on this, let me suggest that we think about this hunger\nor market demand in terms of regions. As Ed Harper pointed out to\nus in his analysis, the issue of support to parochial schools is a hot\nissue in limited areas. The issue of the problems of the aged is almost\ncompletely confined to 8 or 9 states. The farm problem is obviously\nlocalized. Perhaps there is a regional approach to this fireside chat\nidea that would prevent the President from becoming over-exposed\nnationwide and would avoid whatever disadvantages are inherent in such\nover-exposure.\n-4-\nSomething like this would have to be started before campaigning\nbegins in earnest and I know the equal time problem exists, but\nI also know there is a very strong pull for this among people who\nare thinking about the Presidency and about the nation's problems.\nPersonal Appearances\nAside from the fact that it prevents the press from writing that the\nPresident is ducking the people, I don't know that there's a great\ndeal of advantage in personal appearances during the campaign.\nWe've always been very big for rallies, crowd shots, motorcades\nand balloons but I really seriously question whether they are in any\nway important for an incumbent President. It may be that we need\nsome bandwagon psychology but I wouldn't think SO. There are\nobvious tolerance maximums in terms of the use of television, but\nI think those limitations are perhaps limitations on campaigning\ngenerally then, since I think the idea of the President getting out\nand whistle stopping or stumping the nation is doubtful.\nNew Hampshire\nI think I would stay completely away from New Hampshire under the\ncircumstances. McCloskey may do better than anyone thinks at this\ntime simply because he is effective up close and can be expected to\nmake substantial inroads in the meager population of that state by\nan intensive hand-shaking and coffee hour campaign. I would think\nit's safer simply to take the position that New Hampshire has little or\nno significance in terms of the Republican nomination. It happens\nto be the first primary but somebody had to be first and it doesn't\nstand for anything. We might even play up McCloskey's obvious\nadvantage in being able to devote unlimited time to hand-shaking in\nNew Hampshire while the President is busy saving the world.\nMcCloskey's absentee record might be emphasized and our chairman\nup there might make the point that it's more important for the President\nto be hard at work in the White House than up in New Hampshire trying\nto tilt for delegates with some unknown Congressman. If we write it\noff now, we don't have to apologize for any results later,\nassuming we can bring it off.\n-5-\nTrips into the Country\nI would subscribe to John Whitaker's proposal for more issue-\noriented trips and fewer rallies. I don't think I would go quite as\nfar as he in degree but I think he has the right idea. He forgets\nto make the point that most of these issues are regional in character\nand we can pretty well localize our attack on an issue with some\nintelligent analysis. But he is certainly right that trips should be\ntaken to discuss problems.\nRunning as an out\nI think John Connally is right that the President has to run as an out,\nagainst the status quo, rather than as a defender of the status quo.\nThere are simply too many unfulfilled proposals, too many unsolved\nproblems, too many unsatisfied needs and wants as demonstrated by\nthe Harris poll. People don't like the way the country is going and\nthe only way to respond to that discontent is to run against the conditions\nwhich they identify. You have to advocate change under such\ncircumstances, rather than to run on a platform of accomplishment.\nIf it's skillfully done, the President can attack his Senator opponent on\nthe ground that he, the member of Congress, is the defender of the\nstatus quo since the Congress wouldn't change things even though the\nPresident wanted them to. The Senator perpetuated pollution, he\nperpetuated poverty, he perpetuated the conditions in the cities which\nmight have been solved by revenue sharing, etc.\nThe Catholic Vote\nWe are operating under a set of assumptions about the Catholic vote\nthat I suspect are totally invalid. You have seen Roy Morey's\npreliminary analysis and Pat Buchanan's seat-of-the-pants emotional\nresponse. I took the position with Buchanan that Morey had made the\nprima facie case and it was up to Buchanan to sustain his burden of\nproof and I am afraid Pat has not done SO. He has told us with great\nfervor what he, Buchanan, believes but he has no answers for the\nstatistics and polls which indicate the contrary. Because a strongly\npro-Catholic position on some issues costs us votes (as shown by\nthe polls) in the border states and the South, and we are relying on\nthose areas as part of our base of support, we had better be very\nsure of the validity of our assumptions on this subject before we\ngo much farther.\n-6-\nThe Environment\nA somewhat kindred subject is that of the electoral effect of the\nenvironmental issue. There is an instinctive distrust of this\nissue by the President. Yet the polls tell us very clearly that it\nis a highly important issue and everything that we can develop on\nan objective basis tells us over and over again that it is motivating\nand significant. If I read the Harris poll correctly (and it would\nseem inescapable to me on the basis of this poll) people don't want\n\"balance\" between the environment and the economy. We know that\nbalance is right, makes good sense from the standpoint of the future\nof the country, has to be an important consideration in the things we\ndo around here, but it will turn off the environmentally oriented voter.\nAnd here we are talking about broadening our base. It's the young,\nthe women, the middle bracket wage earner who is concerned about\npollution in overwhelming numbers.\nNow, whether we like it or not, and whether the President agrees\nemotionally with the evidence or mt, I think we have to be realistic\nabout this issue and begin to act more politically about it.\nOn both these points, what I wish to argue is that we are making\nemotional responses to these two issues. Rather, we have to be\ncold, calculating and thoroughly political in our analysis of the\nissues and how to treat them.\nLabor\nI'm of two minds on this issue and I don't quite know what to suggest.\nWe need to know a lot more about the situation than we do. We would\nlike to think that we can make inroads into the labor vote; we would\nlike to think we can even pick up some labor leaders at the margin wh O\nwill help us. But we are under heavy attack by our friends at the\nmoment for being soft on labor, for having sold out to labor on Phase II,\nfor having tolerated wage increases and strikes to the serious damage\nof business and the nation and, in effect, for being \"dupes\" who have\nbeen taken into camp by labor, largely on a bluff.\n-7-\nIn a minute I am going to mention credibility. We are telling\npeople not to worry about the China trip and the Russia trip\nbecause the President is tough, he's able to handle them, he\nwon't be taken in by them and they can't bluff him. It is being\nargued that our labor record makes these assertions incredible.\nThe President or the politician?\nTo be reelected the President must attract the support of people\nwho are not party Republicans. The campaign must be inclusive\nrather than exclusive. It must bring to him people who are attracted\nby that extra ingredient rather than by the forme r Senator from\nCalifornia. In other words, everyone knows that the President is\na consummate politician and frequently does things for political\nreasons. They often assign political reasons to things done for non-\npolitical reasons. There's a sort of rebuttable presumption that\neverything the President does is done for political reasons.\nMy thesis is that he will attract additional support if his campaign is\nessentially Presidential and not political. The closerwe get to election\nday the harder it will be not to be political; not to say and do the purely\npolitical thing, to drop the Presidential mantle and wade into the fray\nat the level of the lowest common denominator. Yet I think that\nthe strategy can be that of the front runner which was so successfully\nemployed in the weeks just before the 1968 convention.\nCredibility\nIn thinking about vulnerability, this has to be an avenue that we should\nbe concerned about. McCloskey is already playing this tune in New\nHampshire, to what effect I don't know. I think many people want to\nbelieve that their government officials are trying to pull a fast one,\ntrying to slide one by them, trying to get away with something, etc.\nI think each time Chuck Colson is caught at one of his escapades or\nthe Defense Department is nailed on a North Vietnamese pipeline\nexhibit or we attempt to excuse some indefensible mistake by a\nsubordinate we lose some people that we otherwise could have won.\nThere's no doubt that we re going to be attacked as dishonest and\nincredible and I think we have to lean over backward to avoid\ncreating grounds or even the appearance of grounds for these attacks.\n-8-\nI think the Bureau of Labor Statistics effort, while right, is going\nto cost us in the long run on this score. We're going to have the\nsame trouble in punishing or firing those guilty of leaking.\nSuppression of the truth comes under the general heading of\nincredibility. This is a problem we're going to have to deal with\non an almost daily basis, making the best judgment calls we\ncan but always keeping in mind the overall problem.\nPerhaps under this general heading comes the Justice Department\nand some of its activities lately.\nThe Law and Order Issue\nThe nationwide crime statistics for the last three years have not\nbeen very good. On the other hand, Washington, D. C.'s record\nhas been excellent, given all the problems of this place. In truth,\nthe difference is that we have poured an unbelieveable amount of\nmoney into law enforcement in the District and it is governed by a\ndictatorship rather than an elected Mayor and City Council. We've\nbeen able to do a lot of things in the management of the city\ngovernment that the electorate would never have stood for if they\nhad had any say in it. And it's gotten results.\nI'm not sure how this issue can be handled in the coming campaign.\nI suppose one approach would be to point with pride at the city we\nhave responsibility for and say that big city Democrat Mayors could\ndo the same thing if they were as good as we are. And we can say\nthat we've been trying to send more money to the cities in the form\nof revenue sharing but the Congress wouldn't let us. But all in all\nit is not a good national record and we're going to be on the defensive\nin this area and we'd better start laying some plans right now for\nmeeting the political onslaught. There is no sign that the statistics\nare going to get any better in the coming year.\n-9-\nCivil Rights\nThere is going to be a major political offensive against us in\nthe civil rights area and we will have a separate report coming\nto the President within a couple of weeks as to the dimension\nof this problem and the directions that the attacks probably will\ntake.\nThis memorandum started out to be general and ended up being\nspecific on certain issues. Going back to the general, I think\nthat the President should \"declare peace\" at the start of his campaign,\nsay that the Vietnam war is at an end as he promised it would be,\nthat the country is emerging into an era of peace and prosperity\nand that we have come through the dark night (please, not nightmare)\nwith the President's firm hand on the helm. Many, many problems\nremain to be solved but now we're in a position to attack them with\nthe same leadership, vision and courage that has been displayed in\nbringing us through the problems of war and recession.\nTo earn a generation of peace many international problems are yet\nto be tackled and it's a very bad time to be thinking about changing\nAdministrations, particularly when such a good start has been made\nby the incumbent President.\nWe don't try and defend the domestic status quo; we urge that it be\nchanged and we run against the failures of the Congress (the Democratic\nnominee almost surely coming from that body).\nI apologize for the rambling nature of the memorandum but we'll try\nand organize this subject matter better for you in succeeding notes.\nJohn D. Ehrlichman"
}