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:
To: L. Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE: "Walter De Vries." 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/23/1971
To: Larry Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE: Bruce Merrill's ideas about survey research. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/2/1971
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146186
label
WHSF: Contested, 45-6
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146186
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 45-6
description
This file contains:
To: L. Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE: "Walter De Vries." 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/23/1971
To: Larry Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE: Bruce Merrill's ideas about survey research. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/2/1971
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146186
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1abdcf66e0614493
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
45
6
7/23/1971
Campaign
Memo
To: L. Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE:
"Walter De Vries." 2pgs
45
6
7/2/1971
Campaign
Memo
To: Larry Higby From: Gordon Strachan
RE: Bruce Merrill's ideas about survey
research. 1pg
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Page 1 of 1
Fall
July 23, 1971
chron
MEMORANDUM FOR:
L. HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
SUBJECT:
Walter De Vries
Magruder arranged for Flanigan, Garment, Marik, Marumoto,
and myself to interview Dr. De Vries for the polling
consultant position with the campaign.
Dr. De Vries works almost exclusively for Republicans,
including Romney, Milliken, Rockefeller, and currently
Bob Griffin. His only Democratic candidate is one of
the Louisiana longs who is currently running for gevernor.
His explanation for working for a Democrat is that he
has been given a free rein in terms of research, media,
and campaign management control.
Although his background is basically one of survey
research. He also prepares media spots and does general
campaign consultant work.
He has done a good deal of work analyzing the "ticket
splitter". He has recently completed a book which will
be in print in September. The co-author of the book is
Lance Tarrance, our friend at the Census Bureau. It is
De Vries view that the classic distinctions between
Republicans, Democrats, and Independents do not take
into account the fact that 54% of those who voted in 1970
split their tickets. De Vries believes that the
general trend toward Independents is even larger than
currently indicated by the registration statistics
because even those who register with a particular party
do not demonstrate the standard party loyalty, but rather,
split their ticket.
De Vries is not particularly impressed with ORC or Dr.
Derge as he believes their techniques are too ridged and
old fashioned. In particular, De Vries suggests unifying
the polling and communications aspects of a campaign.
For example, suggested spots or many documentaries or
campaign literature could be pre-tested and analyzed by
the same individuals who are doing the polling in general.
-2-
Another suggestion that De Vries has is that nationwide
polling does not help you determine who the uncommitted
voter is and how to get to him in a key area. He says
that polling should be conducted in the top media markets
in the key states sothat the emphasis of the campaign
can be on these swing voters.
GS:1m
July 2, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
At your request, I saw Mr. Bruce Merrill, the Director of
the Survey Research Center at Arizona State University.
His resume is attached.
Merrill is a very interesting individual who has some
definite ideas about survey research:
1. Simulation will cost at least $1.2 to $2 million.
2. Merrill doubts that simulation is worth it from a
cost effective stand.
3. The problem is not use of simulation, but more effective
use of current polling information.
4. ORC and Benham are competent but old' and static.
5. As you can see from his resume, he has worked for
conservative Republicans, yet he has a very free wheeling
impression of which voters are moving;
6. He disagrees with Kevin Phillips and will send synopsis
of four thesis dissertations, done by his graduate students,
refuting the argument in Phillips book.
7. He thinks the Republican hierarchy has poorly used available
university Republicans.
8. He will also be forwarding to me his comments on Roll's
book, THE HOPES AND PEARS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
GS:1m