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 Timmons to Colson RE: Jack Kemp and McCloskey. 1 pg. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 7/2/1971
From Colson to Haldeman RE: recent Harris polls. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/12/1971
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26145055
label
WHSF: Contested, 7-10
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26145055
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 7-10
description
This file contains:
From Timmons to Colson RE: Jack Kemp and McCloskey. 1 pg. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 7/2/1971
From Colson to Haldeman RE: recent Harris polls. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/12/1971
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26145055
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0ca3fa2d4f7c00fc
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
7
10
7/2/1971
Domestic Policy
Memo
From Timmons to Colson RE: Jack Kemp
and McCloskey. 1 pg.
7
10
7/12/1971
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Haldeman RE: recent Harris
polls. 2 pgs.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Page 1 of 1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
July 2, 1971
E.O. 12065, Section 6-102
By
EP
NARS, Date 1-19-82
CONFIDENTIAL -- EYES ONLY
MEMORANDUM FOR:
CHUCK COLSON
FROM:
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
PT
I know you have a pretty heavy schedule lined up for Jack Kemp to
take on McCloskey. I just want to raise a little warning flag about
Kemp.
Our information about Kemp is that he is not quite the war hawk you
may think. This came out in the briefing sessions we had in the
situation room prior to the Whalen/Nedzi vote. I know Dick Cook
has already passed this on to some of your people, but I wish to re-
emphasize that Kemp has some dovish tendencies and, because he is
a freshman, is not as skillful in debate as some of the more experienced
Congressmen.
A further point is that on Wednesday, Kemp made a floor speech which
criticized the House Commerce Committee for its attempt to cite
Frank Stanton. This is not in the best interest of the President.
Chuck, I know you have a real problem in finding good-looking, articulate
spokesmen to take on McCloskey. But I might suggest that you trade off
a little charisma in favor of a guy like Charlie Gubser who is a loyal
supporter of the President's, knows all the facts, and is skilled in
debate.
CONFIDENTIAL -- EYES ONLY
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE
MARKING
E.O. 12066, Section 6-102
EF
1-19-82
By
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CONFIDENTIAL NARS, Date
July 12, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
wr
SUBJECT:
Harris Polls
You have copies of the Harris polls on Kennedy for this week.
Next week will be the Muskie trial heats, based on the same field
survey of June 9-15. The figures are identical to May. In a 3-way
race, the President trails Muskie, 42-40, Wallace gets 13, 5
undecided. But in a 2-way race, it's 46-46, 8 undecided. Harris
intends to play this as "the President has closed the gap on Muskie's
earlier lead" at least that's the way he's described it to me.
Harris points out that there is an enormous contrast between
Muskie and Kennedy. The President still does well in the South,
40% to Wallace's 27 to Muskie's 26. But, in the West, Muskie
beats us 51-43, in the Mid-West 49-41 and in the East 48-35.
Harris believes that the difference turns on the vote in suburbs
and among independents. Interestingly, we do better against Muskie
on the raw data than when the unlikely voters are eliminated (the
opposite is true with Kennedy). This again illustrates that Muskie
does best with high income, better educated suburbanites. In the
$15, 000 per year and over category, the President beats Kennedy
52-36, but loses to Muskie 54-41. With the independent vote,
however, the President beats Muskie 44-37 (on the last poll in May,
Muskie won the independent vote 45-36 but he has offset this loss by
increasing his lead in the suburbs.
Harris attributes Muskie's strength to the fact that he is bland,
has a neutral image and does not really come across as a partisan
Democrat. The lack of controversy with respect to Muskie is at
this time his great strength, but will in due course tend to wear thin.
The risk to him is that he will become boring and uninspiring.
2.
Lou's close friend, Howard Stein, tells him that there is at least
a 50/50 chance that McCarthy will enter the Presidential race as
a fourth party candidate. As a result, Harris has done a 4-way
poll showing the President at 37, Muskie 35, Wallace 12 and
McCarthy 10.
By way of incidental intelligence, Lou says that the Kennedy people
believe that Humphrey is absolutely dead as a result of the Kennedy/
Johnson papers, that Muskie has been badly hurt but, that Kennedy
has not been affected. I have to assume from this that they feel
there is no ruboff from JFK to Teddy.
On the subject of the New York Times controversy, Harris believes
we should layoff the issue as far as the press issue is concerned;
as he puts it we have come out very well, that the real thrust has
been against the Democrats and Kennedy and Johnson. He is in
the field right now determining what the partisan fallout has been.
Based on what he said I can pretty well surmise what he will come
up with.
He advises that we should be careful not to appear to gloat over the
Democrats' problems, especially LBJ, nor should we on the other
hand appear overly concerned about the recent revelations. We
should stay above the battle; he believes that the Pentagon Papers
controversy will continue while the press issue fades and that our
job is to keep the focus on the Democrats. Harris does not believe
that the press issue is a gut issue, that it doesn't really affect people
or motivate them. The feeling that they have been duped and deceived,
however, is a strong emotional point that will endure.