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 Finch to RN RE: visit to California. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/28/1970
From Haldeman to Finch RE: Lou Harris. 1 pg. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 8/10/1970
From RN to Finch RE: potential meeting with Harris Poll owner Danny Lufkin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/21/1970
Copy of a memo from RN to Finch RE: potential meeting with Harris Poll owner Danny Lufkin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/21/1970
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26144975
label
WHSF: Contested, 6-58
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144975
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 6-58
description
This file contains:
From Finch to RN RE: visit to California. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/28/1970
From Haldeman to Finch RE: Lou Harris. 1 pg. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 8/10/1970
From RN to Finch RE: potential meeting with Harris Poll owner Danny Lufkin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/21/1970
Copy of a memo from RN to Finch RE: potential meeting with Harris Poll owner Danny Lufkin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/21/1970
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1e558605adce4c67
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
6
58
10/28/1970
Campaign
Memo
From Finch to RN RE: visit to California. 2
pgs.
6
58
8/10/1970
Domestic Policy
Memo
From Haldeman to Finch RE: Lou Harris. 1
pg.
6
58
9/21/1970
Campaign
Memo
From RN to Finch RE: potential meeting
with Harris Poll owner Danny Lufkin. 1 pg.
6
58
9/21/1970
Campaign
Memo
Copy of a memo from RN to Finch RE:
potential meeting with Harris Poll owner
Danny Lufkin. 1 pg.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Page 1 of 2
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
6
58
9/25/1970
Campaign
Memo
From John A. Wells to Flanigan RE:
previous telephone call and the 1970
election. The second page of the memo is
absent. 4 pgs.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Page 2 of 2
Finch
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
October 28, 1970
From Bob Finch
Subject: Talking Points - Presidential Visit to California
I
POLLS
Consensus of Spencer Roberts, DMI, Field, Muchmore and
Dorothy Corey.
1. Reagan six to ten points ahead - which would be a victory margin
of 500, 000 to 800, 000 votes. (Give a working equation of about
80 to 90,000 votes for a point in the rest of these rundowns).
2. Murphy four to six points behind.
3. Evelle Younger still favored but O'Brien closing fast.
(Present margin looks like 200, 000).
4. Great voter confusion over the two Flournoys. Incumbent Hugh
Flournoy is still four points ahead in all polls in the Comptroller's
Race. Pat Brown, Jr. of is holding a slim two point lead over
Jim Flournoy (he is the Black).
5. Rafferty is still ahead in the race for Superintendent of Public
Instruction but Riles has come on strong and closed the lead
from three to four percent.
(In this past week - when I have been in and out of here - I endorsed
Rafferty and Jim Flournoy. (I felt I had to do this - endorse Jim
Flournoy as well as I did not want to be in position of being anti- Black
since Riles is a Negro.
II
ISSUES
1.
In all polls, unemployment leads other issues in California.
Considerable television in this last few days of people lined up
collecting unemployment insurance -- Unruh making this major
issue.
Considerable coverage that over 800 people showed up (lined up)
for 40 advertised jobs reading meters for the Metropolitan Water
District in Los Angeles.
- 2 -
II
ISSUES (Continued)
2. Closely following the economic-employment issue is the "social"
issue crime/welfare. Has been highly accentuated by the
murder of the Santa Cruz doctor and his family; the bombing of
the church at the policeman's funeral in San Francisco; the
burning yesterday of the Bank of America at the Irvine Campus,
etc. etc.
3. The third item in all polls is pollution, environment and "quality
of life. 11
III
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.
In urging Murphy's re-election, come down hard on your personal
relationship and longstanding friendship; your confidence in him as
a man; as well as the fact that he supported you on the issues.; that
you know him to be a man of integrity, compassion, a hard worker.
2. It is very important to refer to his family - for the first time this
last week they are bringing his daughter and his son into the
campaign.
The Tricia Nixon spots have been most effective - - she talkes about
having worked in his office, tells how she feels about him, etc. and
this has had quite an impact.
3. The President should predict confidently that we will retain control
of the Legislature and that he is "optimistic" about increasing our
strength in the Congressional Delegation.
4. Unlike any other state I have been in (32 states) it appears we will
have the highest turnout of voters in California. Estimates range
from 70 to 80 percent. Our problem is to make sure it is our vote
that turns out. The unions did the best job in the history of the
state in increasing Democratic registration. Now they are trying
to get that vote out with union dollars - they are paying precinct
people to get their vote out. The President's remarks should be
tailored to get out our vote; not encourage theirs.
5. Come down hard on peace in this generation theme -- and that
Murphy has supported you this theme has gone over very well
out here.
#########
COM IDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 10, 1970
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. FINCH
The President would like you to develop a relationship and
establish a contact with Lou Harris. This can be done
through our supporter Danny Lufkin of New York who is
now part owner of the Harris organization. The President
suggests that you have Harris and Lufkin down to lunch
sometime soon just to get acquainted and establish a
relationship whereby you can keep in touch with Harris -
perhaps suggesting questions to them from time to time
and getting insight from them.
H.R. HALDEMAN H
CONFIDENTIAL
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 21, 1970
DETERMINED TO BE AN
CONFIDENTIAL
ADMINIS
E.O. 12000, Section MARKING
By Emp NARD Date 1-22-81 6-102
MEMORANDUM FOR
Bob Finch
FROM THE PRESIDENT
Rm
In your travel around it occurred to me that on
some occasion you might have a talk with our friend in New
York who owns the Harris Poll. Perhaps a direct talk with
you and Harris and him participating (his name is Danny
Lufkin) might pay some dividends.
On the other side of the coin it might be well to
do some effective work in discrediting Harris since we know
that as the campaign date approaches he will be out to
hammer us down.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 21, 1970
DETERMINED TO BE AN
CONFIDENTIAL
ADMIN
E
KING
j
By
Emp
Soction
6-102
Date 1-22-81
MEMORANDUM FOR
Bob Finch
FROM THE PRESIDENT
In your travel around it occurred to me that on
some occasion you might have a talk with our friend in New
York who owns the Harris Poll. Perhaps a direct talk with
you and Harris and him participating (his name is Danny
Lufkin) might pay some dividends.
On the other side of the coin it might be well to
do some effective work in discrediting Harris since we know
that as the campaign date approaches he will be out to
hammer us down.
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12065, Section 6-102
By emp NARS, Date 1-23-81
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM
September 25, 1970
To:
Peter M. Flanigan
From: John A. Wells
Following our telephone conversation of last Wednesday morning,
I collected (without disclosing persons or purposes) such information as
was pertinent and available. Yesterday morning, of course, the New
York Times carried a front-page story by Bob Semple under a Washing-
ton dateline headed A 'Neutral' Nixon Is Reported To Favor Buckley Over
Goodell. The story was so detailed that, as is usually the case concern-
ing Time's front-page top political story, everyone here is assuming
reasonable accuracy. The Governor and his campaign people are not
happy about the prospect of more direct and less "subtle signals, " to use
Semple's phrase, evidencing Buckley support by the White House.
You stated that you would be interested in my evaluation of the
Buckley campaign in terms of its effectiveness and his electability and
my views on the desirability of more direct action, e. g., Vice President's
attendance at a Buckley fund-raising party in New York and activities by
Tom Evans.
My immediate reaction, expressed to you, was that Buckley will
not win, and that it would be undesirable from any Republican point of view
for the White House to indicate support for him. After some fact-finding
and fuller consideration, my views to the same effect are much stronger.
May I assure you that I have kept confidential your call and the
information you gave me. Although I am fairly close to the Governor's
campaign on an advisory basis, this is my only possible bias, and I have
tried to consider this question in the context of the President's best inter-
ests in New York now and in 1972.
I do not believe it would be in the best interests of the White House
to go further in endorsing Mr. Buckley for the following reasons:
1. All indications are that Buckley will not beat Ottinger, so
there is no good reason to incur any political exposure. The chances of a
-3-
Conservative Party is small, with a narrow manpower
base. Its state-wide enrollment is about 80, 000. It is
controlled by two brothers-in-law, Bill Mahoney and
Kieren O'Doherty, who like it the way it is. The
residual party strength on Election Day and the ability
to identify and get out the vote is not there: Buckley
will do very well, but he will not, in my judgment and
on the basis of the present situation, come reasonably
close to Ottinger.
I estimate that, assuming a state-wide vote of
6 million, the returns on November 3 (and Ottinger's
margin could be substantially larger) will be about as
follows:
Ottinger
-
2,500,000
Buckley
-
2,000,000
Goodell
-
1,500,000
2. Endorsement of Buckley, who is not the official Republican
candidate, would be contrary to the President's past policy of going with
the candidate chosen by the Republican Party at a convention or in a prim-
ary. Last year, the White House endorsed Marchie for Mayor against
Lindsay on this basis.
3. A major reason for Goodell's unpopularity with some (far
from a majority) of New York Republicans was his non-supportive actions
and statements in the 1968 presidential campaign. For the President to
oppose him now might seem a small act of personal vengeance. Then, too,
the President has many times said that the Republican Party is big enough
for everyone (vide his attitude toward Javits in 1968), and I am sure that
he believes thatproposition and is correct in that belief.
4. Governor Rockefeller, as the leader of the Republican Party
in New York, supported Senator Goodell for renomination. There were
good reasons for this decision, which was necessarily made in late 1969;
the polls showed Goodell was by far the strongest candidate at that time,
no political leader likes to admit that he made a mistake on the original
appointment (assuming he did), and there would have been a divisive,
state-wide primary fight by Goodell and perhaps other contestants if the
Governor had attempted to dictate the nomination of a replacement.
Another reason, of course, was that the Governor (like the Presi-
dent) realizes that he must have the broadest possible middle base extending
-4-
as far as feasible to the conservatives on the right and the liberals on the
left. (See Scannons and Wattenberg's new book which is excellent on this
point. ) The Governor originally elected as a "liberal" has always stayed
as close to the middle as possible, but with the drift of the whole body
politic being to the right (but much less so in "liberal" New York) he needed
a symbol for those liberals, particularly in New York City, who had sup-
ported him in 1966 and previously. Goodell is the anchor on the liberal
side, he is the symbol, and he cannot, be cut adrift.
Goldberg's best chance is to push Rockefeller to the right and
grab more of the liberal middle. He knows this. The New York Times
this morning (Friday) has a story by Clayton Knowles (p. 47) headed
Goldberg Links Governor and Buckley. Knowles wrote that Goldberg said
yesterday that "Governor Rockefeller supported the White House in its
reported acceptance of, even preference for, James L. Buckley for the
United States Senate.
Having opted for his renomination, the Governor must now support
Goodell and is doing so and will necessarily continue to do so. It would be
most unfortunate -- and the Democrats and the newspapers will have a field
day -- if the White House supports Buckley. It will appear to many that
this is a confrontation between the President and the Governor. It will seem
that Bill Buckley has more standing with the President than Nelson Rockefeller.
The Governor doesn't deed this, and looking forward to carrying New York
for the President in 1972, the President doesn't need it either.
5. In the event of such a confrontation, the principal emphasis
of the state-wide campaign might well shift from Rockefeller V. Goldberg
to the Ottinger-Buckley-Goodell contest. This could jeopardize the Gover-
nor's re-election. To the extent that a White House endorsement weakens
Goodell, it also increases his "drag" on the Rockefeller-led Republican line.
The gubernatorial contest is close, either man is probably up or down by a
few points. The polls are far from reliable, since the pollsters this year
are being kidded as never before by the voters, and this is particularly true
of the Jewish voters in New York City.
Conclusion
I respectfully suggest that the White House should not move another
inch further toward supporting Buckley than it already has and should let
nature take its course in New York. I believe that the President's most
important interest in New York's 1970 election is the re-election of
-5-
Governor Rockefeller. In the President's book Six Crises he points out
the importance to the national party of governorships and, in fact, it was
the loss of Republican governorships in the Eisenhower years which was
the reason for Vice President Nixon's defeat in- 1960.
####