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:
Teeter's detailed analysis of the second wave of campaign polling compiled for Haldeman. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/1/1972
From Teeter to MacGregor RE: RN's ratings on inflation and taxes as revealed through polling. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/31/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146290
label
WHSF: Contested, 46-6
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146290
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 46-6
description
This file contains:
Teeter's detailed analysis of the second wave of campaign polling compiled for Haldeman. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/1/1972
From Teeter to MacGregor RE: RN's ratings on inflation and taxes as revealed through polling. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/31/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146290
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4cf5f813b64988fb
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
46
6
8/1/1972
Campaign
Memo
Teeter's detailed analysis of the second wave
of campaign polling compiled for Haldeman.
8 pgs.
46
6
7/31/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Teeter to MacGregor RE: RN's ratings
on inflation and taxes as revealed through
polling. 6 pgs.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Page 1 of 1
[Item N-1.]
A
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
August 1, 1972
DETERMINED TO BE AN
NFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12085, Section 6-102
By
emp
NARS, Date 6.17-
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
ROBERT M. TEETER
RMT
SUBJECT:
Second Wave Polling Results
This memorandum is to summarize the briefings I am giving the White
House personnel you requested I meet with.
We are in relatively good shape against McGovern in terms of
the sample ballots. We have broken the pattern of the President
only getting 42-46% of the committed vote for the first time. In
several of the priority states his committed vote is near or above
50%. We continue to have some problems in Missouri, Oregon, Wisconsin,
and Washington although our situation has improved from the first
wave. We have rated each of the states we polled A, B, C, D, and E.
With A meaning we are in very good shape, B in relatively good shape,
C that it is close, D we are in not` too good shape, and E we are in
bad shape.
Ratings
A
B
C
D
E
Alabama
California
Michigan
Wisconsin
None
Connecticut
Maryland
Missouri
Illinois
New Jersey
Oregon
Ohio
New York
Washington
Texas
Pennsylvania
The President is doing very well for a Republican candidate with all
three voting behavior groups. He is losing almost no Republicans,
he has substantial leads with the ticket-splitters and is cutting into
the Democrats at the 25-30% level. At this point he is doing
significantly better among the ticket-splitters than he did in 1968.
Our data indicates that there are two basic groups of ticket-splitters
with which we need to be concerned. The first group has been splitting
their ticket for some time and in recent years have been splitting
in favor of winning Republicans. They tend to be in the 25-50 age
group, to be somewhat better educated than the average voter, to have
slightly higher incomes than the average voter, in general they are
from the upper middle class, and are typically suburbanites.
-2-
The second group are those who have only begun to split their
ticket in the past few years and who have previously voted straight
Democratic. Even though they are now clearly ticket-splitters and
are available to us in this campaign, they will still probably vote
for a majority of Democrats. Many of them split for Wallace in the
last election and many switched from Wallace to Humphrey late in
the campaign. This group is lower on the socio-economic scale than
the first group and age is somewhat less of a factor. They are
often (but not necessarily) Catholic, and in the large cities of
the East and Midwest, often have ethnic backgrounds. They are
essentially the blue collar working middle class.
Candidate Perception
The President is rated quite well on the three key personality
dimensions -- trustworthiness, strength, and competence. He is
rated higher on the trustworthy dimension now than he was in
January and this is a scale on which we rarely see any movement
for a well-known figure. However, there is no significant differ-
ence between the President and McGovern on the trust or strength
dimensions. He gets his highest ratings by far on the competence
dimension and has a large advantage over McGovern.
Several specific questions were asked concerning credibility and
the results indicate that a significant number, though a minority,
do not think the administration has been completely honest with
them, particularly with regard to Vietnam. However, when viewed
against the President's personal trustworthiness ratings I think
that the problem is as much one of government not being credible
as it is of the President himself not being credible. More impor-
tantly, I think this is a problem that can be at least partially
solved by separating the President from it and then having him
attack the problem. Although he hasn't gotten much credit for it,
he appears to have done this to a degree by ordering the reviews
of classification and secrecy procedures. Another possibility
might be for him to attack the pork-barrelling practice of Congress
adding non-related spending items to major appropriation bills if
and when he vetoes some major spending bills.
The President however does get fairly low ratings on the amiability
or friendliness dimensions. While he is seen as trustworthy, strong,
and competent he is not seen as warm, friendly, etc. There is no
indication, however, that this is detracting from his support. In
contrast to 10-12 years ago, being dynamic or friendly is simply not
viewed as being an important qualification for the Presidency. This
is not to say, however, that higher ratings on these scales would
not be of some assistance in attracting new votes.
The President is also seen to a degree as a one dimensional President.
That is, in contrast to some past Presidents, he is viewed almost
exclusively as one who is the chief of State, and the head of the
- 3 -
government rather than as the head or leader of an entire culture -
sports, the arts, life style, etc. In a sense he is viewed as a
"professional" President, that is, one who is trained, experienced,
competent, respected for his ability, and concerned with the official
duties of his job full time. There is also no evidence that this
is losing us any votes at all.
McGovern's perception is still being set at this time. Although
most of the respondents could rate him on the various personality
and issue scales, his various ratings were similar indicating that
the knowledge of him is quite superficial.
Compared to the President, McGovern's ratings for trustworthiness,
strength, and amiability were not significantly different from the
President's but he was rated much less competent than the President.
I would expect to see McGovern's personal image take much more
definite shape in the next few weeks.
The most important issues continue to be Vietnam and the economy,
particularly inflation, both in terms of general concern and of
importance in voting for the President. Taxes, drugs, personal
safety are also important but definitely secondary to Vietnam and
inflation. The minor issues such as abortion and marijuana do not
appear to be affecting Presidential vote. The tendency to lump
amnesty, abortion, and marijuana all together is not supported by
the data. Amnesty is viewed as part of the Vietnam issues and there-
fore relatively important. Abortion is not seen as a major national
problem and the voters are split almost equally on this question of
liberalizing abortion statutes. Liberalization of the marijuana
statutes is opposed by a substantial majority, but is not seen as
an important issue in the Presidential election.
Bussing is seen as a moderately important problem in those local
areas where it is a reality or there is a pending decision but is
not at all an important issue outside of those areas. It is not a
major national issue and while we may want to use it in those areas
that have been directly affected, there is no reason for us to make it
a national issue.
Unemployment is a moderately important issue but not one which is
currently costing us any votes at this time. Very few people who
are most subject to unemployment are potential Nixon voters. This
will probably remain the case as long as it continues to decline.
There appears to be a threshold at which unemployment becomes a
major concern of large numbers of voters whether they are unemployed
or not but below that level only those who are unemployed are
immediately threatened are concerned. Undoubtedly this is also
related to the trend of the unemployment statistics. The issue of
more and better jobs has, however, always been an effective issue
and even though unemployment per se is not a major concern, I don't
think we should overlook the job issue.
-4-
The general issue of national defense is also seen as a moderately
important issue but with varying attitudes about the specifics.
There is support for the idea that a strong national defense is a
means to peace. Yet a large majority think we should cut our armed
forces. The reason for this is, however, a belief that there is
great waste in the defense department, not that we don't need a
strong national defense.
% Mention As One of Top
Three Problems Facing U.S.
Vietnam
57
Crime
14
Inflation
13
Drugs
13
Economy
12
Race
11
Unemployment
11
Environment
11
Poverty
9
Taxes
7
Bussing
5
There is some concern on the part of a large group of voters, many
of them ours, or potentially ours, with the general issue of change
and of the concentration of power in large institutions -- govern-
ment, labor, business. This issue does not appear to be specific
or to have taken shape yet but looks like one which could become
of increasing importance. Any of our questions which even hinted
at the need for change or the concentration of power issue got
strong responses on the side of change and more concern for the
individual citizen.
This appears to be particularly true with regard to large unions.
More people blame them for inflation than blame business, or the
President and Congress combined and other recent data indicates a
real lack of sympathy with large or crippling strikes. With regard
to business, the problem seems to be one of a lack of faith in the
honesty or with being adequately concerned with either the customer's
or the public's welfare.
Government is seen as too expensive, distant, inefficient, and
simply ineffective. The citizenry simply does not think they are
getting their moneys worth for their taxes. At the same time,
however, they want and expect government to solve whatever problems
they presumably think are important.
-5-
With just three exceptions the President's ratings on his handling
of issues have held fairly constant and positive since January.
Between January and June his ratings on the change issue increased
significantly and his ratings on inflation and taxes dropped markedly.
His rating on Vietnam remains high with 35% more people rating him
positively than negatively.
McGovern's ratings are fairly positive but not very well defined
as yet. This, however, may not change for the majority of the
issues in the short time between now and the election.
ISSUE HANDLING
Nixon
McGovern
Positive
Negative
Positive
Negative
Vietnam
65%
30%
42%
26%
Inflation
47
46
41
42
General Unrest
57
33
43
20
Crime
56
36
46
17
Unemployment
50
43
43
20
Drugs
53
36
44
18
Taxes
46
48
40
24
Bussing
46
40
35
24
Health Care
69
21
50
12
National Defense
73
18
43
23
Environment
60
30
50
11
Racial Problems
60
31
43
20
Foreign Policy
81
11
40
22
Welfare
52
39
43
22
Conclusions
One of the unique things in this set of data is its consistency
across the various states particularly with the perception of the
President. His strong and weak points in terms of personal per-
ception is very similar in all of the priority states. The major
issue concerns are also fairly uniform across states but there is
some significant variance in the importance of the secondary issues.
In the top priority states the President's pattern of support is
very close to that which Republicans have won with before,
that is to get 90-95% of the Republicans, 15-20% of the Democrats,
and a large enough majority of the ticket-splitters to win.
Assuming we get 95% of the Republicans and 15% of the Democrats,
the following table lists the percentages of the ticket-splitters
we must get in each of the priority states to win a two-way race.
-6-
Minimum Percentage of Ticket-Splitters
Needed to Win State
California
70%
Connecticut
60
Illinois
60
Michigan
75
Missouri
75
New Jersey
60
New York
65
Ohio
55
Oregon
60
Pennsylvania
70
Washington
65
Wiscortsin
70
Our first priority is to re-create what has been the proven winning
coalition in those states before. This means we need to get majorities
among those who have traditionally split their ticket. Our next
priority should then be to go after the Democrats who have just
begun to split their tickets. We also should go after those Democrats
who have not yet split their tickets but are similar demographically
to those who have. Past experience indicates that some campaign
effort directed at these people will cause some new ticket-splitting.
In terms of issues we should concentrate on the major national issue
Vietnam, the economy, taxes, drugs, and crime. These are the issues
that are going to decide the most Presidential votes and it is to
our advantage to keep the campaign directed to them and not on the
minor issues of abortion and marijuana.
While the data on the President is generally optimistic there are
two soft spots or potential problems that need attention. His
ratings on inflation and taxes are poor and down sharply from January.
These issues are closely related and important to Presidential vote.
We have some weakness in the general issues of change. A large
majority think we need fairly drastic change and they do not see
the President as being for this change. I think it is important
that we show the President as an innovator and as one who is for
responsible change as opposed to McGovern who is for radical and
irresponsible change.
We should move as soon as possible to harden up these soft spots
while they don't appear to be costing us any sizable groups of votes
now, they are points at which we are vulnerable to attack. We
should move before McGovern has a chance too.
-7-
There are several elements that I think should be present in the
general thrust or image of the campaign. First, it should have a
central idea or theme. We know from the first wave data that the
President is viewed as a tactican and as one without a master plan
or strategy for the country. A theme or central idea would give
us the common thread with which to tie together all of his accomplish-
ments and give the voters a reason to vote for the President.
Second, the campaign should show the breath and complexity of the
President's accomplishments and proposals. One of the elements of
his support is that he is doing a good job in a very difficult or
impossible job. This would take advantage of that feeling.
Third, it should show the President as an innovator and for responsible
change for the reasons discussed earlier.
Fourth, it should show him as being concerned about improving the
lives of the citizens. We need to emphasize that the ultimate pur-
pose behind all the President's trips, programs, and actions is to
help our citizens enjoy better lives. We need to communicate how
him program is going to help "you" not some special interest group
or institution.
Fifth, we should emphasize those plus qualities which the President
is seen as having and which are believable - knowledgeable, wise,
competent - and not try to make him something he isn't.
The campaign should have the element of hope. The voters have got
to believe that things are going to improve over the next four years
with Richard Nixon as President or they have no reason to vote for
him. They are not going to reward him for the past four years.
One of the basic elements of the American attitude and of American
politics has always been hope for better times. People don't like
negativism.
We should work to the people's desire for a more calm, orderly, and
peaceful life style. Even though we may be on the side of the
majority, it does not serve our purpose to become strident or
increase the acrimony in the country. One of the problems with
the '70 campaign was that while people were against long hair
hippies, marijuana, permissiveness, etc. what they were for was
a return to a peaceful, orderly life style and while our campaign
was on the majority side, we were seen as making the fight two sided
but adding to the acrimony.
We now have a fairly large lead which will probably decline, at
least partially. However, as long as we have a substantial lead
it is to our advantage to keep things calm and on the high road.
We should take as few chances as possible and not let it get close.
-8-
This is not to say, however, that we should not do anything to
introduce some negatives on McGovern. We do need to have a fairly
regular flow of negative material on him while his perception is
being set but we should take full advantage of his own problems
and let the press do as much of it as they will without our help.
However, if McGovern's negative press does taper off, we should
be very careful about how we attack him. We simply cannot take
a chance of damaging the President's respect and trust which are
not yet particularly deep or well set. Any attacks on McGovern
should be directed at the extreme nature of his positions and not
at him personally.
ONLY
[Item
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
July 31, 1972
ONLY
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE CLARK MacGREGOR
FROM:
ROBERT M. TEETER
RMT
SUBJECT:
Inflation and Taxes
While the second wave data is generally very optimistic, two potential
problems are apparent. The President's ratings on inflation and taxes
have fullen sharply since January and he appears to be vulnerable
on the'more general issue of change against McGovern. This memorandum
summarizes the data on inflation and taxes. The change issue will be
covered in a subsequent memorandum.
In all states surveyed the President has experienced a substantial
decline in his ratings on his handling of inflation.
Percentage Rating the Preisdent's
Selected
Handling of Inflation as Positive
States
Wave I
Wave II
Change
California
62%
45%
-17%
Illinois
*
47
N/A
Maryland
69
48
-21
Missouri
64
45
-19
New Jersey
65
37
-28
New York
62
43
-19
Ohio
69
47
-22
Oregon
59
40
-19
Pennsylvania
70
47
-23
Texas
68
52
-16
Wisconsin
63
49
-14
In January, approximately two-thirds of the voters gave the President
positive ratings on handling inflation while today equal numbers of
voters give him positive ratings as give him negative ratings.
Overall the President's ability to handle inflation has dropped about
17%, across the priority states. A similar decline is also evident in
the percentage approving of the way the President handled all economic matters.
*
Comparable data on Wave I is not available.
- 2 -
This decline results from the feeling that the problem has worsened
durign the past six months and that his programs have not slowed
rising prices. Half of all voters and more significantly half of the
ticket-splitters now share this view. The problem is especially
acute with respect to food prices. Seventy-two percent of the voters
hold the opinion that rising food prices have not been slowed. This
belief is held consistently by all demographic groups and in all
geographic regions, although it is particularly pronounced in several
large metropolitan areas.
Nearly two-thirds of the voters give the President negative inflation
ratings in Chicago, Philadelphia, New York City, St. Louis, Detroit,
Newark, Northern California, Milwaukee and Tacoma.
At the same time only 8% of the voters blame the President directly
for causing inflation. The greatest mention went to unions blamed
by 37% as most responsible for rising prices. Business is seen as the
next greatest cause being mentioned by 36%.
In terms of solutions, 66% would favor more drastic measures such as
a total freeze on food prices similar to Phase I.
Taken together the above data may indicate that although the voters
do not blame the President for causing inflation, they do not think he
has been effective in solving it.
Similar to the situation in inflation, the President's perceived
ability to handle taxes has declined significantly in most states
since the first wave.
Percentage Rating President's
Handling of Taxes as Positive
Selected
States
Wave I
Wave II
Change
California
53%
44%
- 9%
Illinois
*
48
N/A
Maryland
65
48
-17
Missouri
61
53
- 8
New Jersey
48
36
-12
New York
50
43
- 7
Ohio
62
50
-12
Oregon
54
39
-15
Pennsylvania
57
44
-13
Texas
68
56
-12
Wisconsin
54
42
-12
*Taxes not included on Wave I Illinois poll.
- 3 -
Tax reform may be especially important in the campaign because it
is an issue on which McGovern's perceived position is closer to
the general population's position than Nixon's and one which is
related to the change issue. The data from the seven large states
is almost identical to Illinois which is demonstrated below.
Self
T-S
D
R
Mc
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do not need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.4
Total Rating Nixon:
4.4
Total Rating McGovern:
3.0
Rep.:
2.6
Rep. Rating Nixon
3.6
Rep. Rating McGovern:
2.9
T-S:
2.4
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.2
T-S Rating McGovern:
2.9
Dem.:
2.0
Dem. Rating Nixon:
4.9
Dem. Rating McGovern:
3.2
(See Attachment for other states)
In Illinois 77% of the voters favor tax reform with only 11% opposed.
The important point is not so much that a large majority favor major
tax reform as it is that the President is seen'as being opposed to
tax reform. Although McGovern enjoys a better position overall than
Nixon on tax questions, 63% of the voters specifically oppose the
McGovern proposal to give direct financial aid to those with less than
$12,000 income and thereby resulting in higher taxes for those with
incomes over $12,000.
With regard to local property taxes, 51% favor continuation of it
as the means to finance public education compared to 40% who are
opposed. Those opposed would favor a national sales tax to replace
local property taxes followed by federal income tax and sales tax
as alternatives.
Conclusions
Inflation and taxes are clearly related in the minds of the voters
and are the greatest potential problems evident in the data. While
we do not appear to be losing any significant number of votes on
these issues now, it is definitely a potential problem and one we
should act to solve soon. I have seen instances where this kind of
attitude shift has not immediately resulted in loss of ballot strength
but later caught up with the candidate and cost him votes. Should
McGovern begin to gain strength and segments of the Democratic coalition
begin to come back together, inflation and taxes appear to be the issues
that could be most effectively be used against US.
-4-
We should keep in mind that while inflation is related to all
elements of the rising cost of living, including taxes, most
voters relate it directly to food prices.
I think that the President should take some action dealing with
the inflation problem immediately and that the tax reform problem
should be handled some time early in the campaign before McGovern
has a chance to get a hold of it. If the President can boost his
rating on inflation near the January level, it should carry through
the election. While I do not think tax reform is as urgent as
inflation, it is an important issue and one on which we are
especially vulnerable to McGovern. Tax reform seems to be related
to the general issue of economic and social change and to the con-
centration of power issue on which McGovern appears to have an
advantage.
Inflation and tax reform are problems the President should handle
persorally. They are important with virtually every significant group
in the electorate and he should get the direct benefit of any action
he takes. The key criteria of whatever action he takes should be
that it be clearly seen as being in the interests of the individual
worker and consumers and not for any special interest group.
The surrogate program should then continue to communicate the President's
action on inflation and taxes in those geographic areas of the country
where they are particularly important and where the President receives
low ratings on his ability to handle these issues.
I believe that the President would gain in overall strength if he
were to take strong action against rising food prices, even though
there might be some temporary decline in strength from the farm belt.
However, there are simply many more food purchasers than farmers,
particularly in the top priority states.
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
ATTACHMENT
(Tax Reform)
CALIFORNIA
Self
D T-S
R
N
Mc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do Not Need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.2
Total Rating Nixon:
4.4
Total Rating McGovern:
2.8
Rep:
2.8
Rep. Rating Nixon:
3.5
Rep. Rating McGovern:
2.6
T-S:
2.2
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.4
T-S Rating McGovern:
2.9
Dem:
1.9
Dem. Rating Nixon:
4.9
Dem. Rating McGovern:
2.8
NEW JERSEY
Self
T-S
R
D
Mc
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do Not Need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.2
Total Rating Nixon:
4.5
Total Rating McGovern:
2.7
Rep:
2.7
Rep. Rating Nixon:
4.0
Rep. Rating McGovern:
2.5
T-S:
2.1
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.4
T-S Rating McGovern:
2.9
Dem:
2.1
Dem. Rating Nixon:
4.8
Dem. Rating McGovern:
2.6
NEW YORK
Self
D
T-S
R Mc
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do Not Need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.0
Total Rating Nixon:
4.4
Total Rating McGovern:
2.7
Rep:
2.4
Rep. Rating Nixon:
3.5
Rep. Rating McGovern:
2.7
T-S:
2.1
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.2
T-S Rating McGovern:
2.6
Dem:
1.8
Dem. Rating Nixon:
5.0
Dem. Rating McGovern:
2.6
Attachment Cont d.
OHIO
Self
T-S
R
D
Mc
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do Not Need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.3
Total Rating Nixon:
4.3
Total Rating McGovern:
2.7
Rep:
2.8
Rep. Rating Nixon:
3.7
Rep. Rating McGovern:
2.4
T-S:
2.3
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.2
T-S Rating McGovern:
2.7
Dem:
2.0
Dem. Rating Nixon:
4.7
Dem. Rating McGovern:
2.9
PENNSYLVANIA
Self
T-S
D
R
Mc
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do Not Need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.2
Total Rating Nixon:
4.2
Total Rating McGovern:
2.9
Rep:
2.5
Rep. Rating Nixon:
3.6
Rep. Rating McGovern:
3.1
T-S:
2.1
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.2
T-S Rating McGovern:
2.7
Dem:
2.1
Dem. Rating Nixon:
4.5
Dem. Rating McGovern:
2.9
TEXAS
Self
T-S
D
R
Mc
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Need Tax
Do Not Need
Reform
Tax Reform
Self:
2.7
Total Rating Nixon:
4.4
Total Rating McGovern:
3.4
Rep:
3.1
Rep. Rating Nixon:
4.0
Rep. Rating McGovern:
3.2
T-S:
2.6
T-S Rating Nixon:
4.4
T-S Rating McGovern:
3.4
Dem:
2.6
Dem. Rating Nixon:
4.4
Dem. Rating McGovern:
3.3
ONLY