Ask the Scholar
Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
47
13
2/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Staff Secretary. From: Charles Colson.
RE: Action memo P-2009 Plesser Poll. 2pgs
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Page 1 of 1
P2009
February 7. 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE STAFF SECRETARY
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
SUBJECT:
Action Memo #P-2009
Plesser Poll
Request
It was requested in Action Memo #P-2009, taken from the February 1
News Summary to prepare a brief analysis of 4 recent Pleaser poll
and of his organisation and techniques.
Response
I talked to Nelson Rockefeller's office with regard to Tully Pleaser.
They have had a lot of experience with him and regard his work as
totally unreliable. He is apparently for sale to the highest bidder. His
most recent poll was done for Lindsay and Rockefeller's people suspect
very strongly that this really was a Lindsay plant. The theory makes
some sense. It shows Nixon beating Muskie which is to Lindsay's
advantage. It also shows strong anti-Nixon sentiment which is also to
Lindsay's advantage.
It has been reported that Pleaser has just taken a Florida poll for
Lindsay so he apparently is still doing Lindsay's work.
John Becker has a similar report about Pleaser. He feels he is very
unreliable and that there is no way to measure so-called "leverage
issues". The Attorney General tells me that Pleaser is totally untrust-
worthy. Scammen also discounts his pell.
Sindlinger is the harshest of all. He has been asking since 1969 the
question, "Would you vote today for the reelection of President Nixon
2.
Since September the "mo" answers have averaged 15 percent. During
that period of time Sindlinger has run 5 polls surveys. Each sample
base has been 2000; hence there is a 10, 000 total sample base. In
each poll the "no" answers have ranged between 14 and 16 percent.
Pleaser reports that he used a similar technique and gets a 33 percent
"no". In view of the very large sample base of Sindlinger, the Pleaser
results would seem to be demonstrably in error.
I further understand that Plesser wanted to work for the Campaign
Committee and was turned down. He may well be bitter.
Document source description
This file contains:
To: Staff Secretary. From: Charles Colson. RE: Action memo P-2009 Plesser Poll. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/7/1972
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 317146512865b81a
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 26146410
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "26146410",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26146410",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "WHSF: Contested, 47-13",
"description": "This file contains:\n\nTo: Staff Secretary. From: Charles Colson. RE: Action memo P-2009 Plesser Poll. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/7/1972",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26146410",
"collections": [
"Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
"Contested Materials Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "26146410",
"label": "WHSF: Contested, 47-13",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26146410"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "26146410",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26146410",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "WHSF: Contested, 47-13",
"description": "This file contains:\n\nTo: Staff Secretary. From: Charles Colson. RE: Action memo P-2009 Plesser Poll. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/7/1972",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26146410",
"collections": [
"Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
"Contested Materials Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26146410",
"naId": 26146410,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/10/1464/26146410/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-47/Contested-47-13.pdf",
"mediaId": "317146512865b81a",
"ocrText": "Richard Nixon Presidential Library\nContested Materials Collection\nFolder List\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n47\n13\n2/7/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nTo: Staff Secretary. From: Charles Colson.\nRE: Action memo P-2009 Plesser Poll. 2pgs\nTuesday, March 20, 2012\nPage 1 of 1\nP2009\nFebruary 7. 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE STAFF SECRETARY\nFROM:\nCHARLES COLSON\nSUBJECT:\nAction Memo #P-2009\nPlesser Poll\nRequest\nIt was requested in Action Memo #P-2009, taken from the February 1\nNews Summary to prepare a brief analysis of 4 recent Pleaser poll\nand of his organisation and techniques.\nResponse\nI talked to Nelson Rockefeller's office with regard to Tully Pleaser.\nThey have had a lot of experience with him and regard his work as\ntotally unreliable. He is apparently for sale to the highest bidder. His\nmost recent poll was done for Lindsay and Rockefeller's people suspect\nvery strongly that this really was a Lindsay plant. The theory makes\nsome sense. It shows Nixon beating Muskie which is to Lindsay's\nadvantage. It also shows strong anti-Nixon sentiment which is also to\nLindsay's advantage.\nIt has been reported that Pleaser has just taken a Florida poll for\nLindsay so he apparently is still doing Lindsay's work.\nJohn Becker has a similar report about Pleaser. He feels he is very\nunreliable and that there is no way to measure so-called \"leverage\nissues\". The Attorney General tells me that Pleaser is totally untrust-\nworthy. Scammen also discounts his pell.\nSindlinger is the harshest of all. He has been asking since 1969 the\nquestion, \"Would you vote today for the reelection of President Nixon\n2.\nSince September the \"mo\" answers have averaged 15 percent. During\nthat period of time Sindlinger has run 5 polls surveys. Each sample\nbase has been 2000; hence there is a 10, 000 total sample base. In\neach poll the \"no\" answers have ranged between 14 and 16 percent.\nPleaser reports that he used a similar technique and gets a 33 percent\n\"no\". In view of the very large sample base of Sindlinger, the Pleaser\nresults would seem to be demonstrably in error.\nI further understand that Plesser wanted to work for the Campaign\nCommittee and was turned down. He may well be bitter."
}