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 Khachigian RE: H.G. Klein-Suggested Items for Face the Nation. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 1/7/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146494
label
WHSF: Contested, 48-11
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146494
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 48-11
description
This file contains:
From Khachigian RE: H.G. Klein-Suggested Items for Face the Nation. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 1/7/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146494
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
deb7bd15f31b8435
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
48
11
1/7/1972
Campaign
Other Document
From Khachigian RE: H.G. Klein-Suggested
Items for Face the Nation. 3 pgs.
Wednesday, June 03, 2015
Page 1 of 1
Khachigian
1/7/72
H.G. KLEIN -- Face the Nation -- Suggested Items
Obvious discussion will arise on the merits of the President's
opposition in the campaign year. I suggest some of the following
points be made:
-- An effort should be made to exacerbate Democratic
differences. Gene McCarthy has severely criticized Ed Muskie
for his strong support of the Vietnam war in 1968. McGovern has
challenged Muskie to statewide debates in New Hampshire and has
attacked consistently that Muskie is not liberal enough. Jackson
thinks all the other Dems are too far on the Left -- he strongly
opposes bussing and wants a stronger military as well as being
strong on law and order. Making these points and other might
help to bring to the public eye the squabbling among the Dems.
-- An impression should be conveyed of the Democrats in
totaly disarray -- a party who has no true leader and thus has
so many presidential candidates as to make their party's leader- -
ship seem ludicrous. Portray the Democratic party as bankrupt
of ideas as well as leadership; of not saying anything positive, but
only attacking the President; of having not much vision but a great
deal of partisanship. If they can't run their party, how can they
run their country?
Page 2
-- I would puff up Humphrey. You probably will be asked
who the White House thinks is the most likely Dem candidate.
Obviously, HHH would be our best opponent. He should be
praised as a great Dem party leader -- one who has labored in the
vineyards. Offer the opinion that Humphrey is a strong leader and
would again be a strong opponent. This should obviously be done
in a way which doesn't amount to an endorsement of HHH, but rather
an observation that HHH is much better than the rest and much
stronger politically than the press portrays him to be.
-- On the Anderson Papers, the question will be raised of
credibility, and I think this ought to be turned right around and
thrown back at the Dems. E. E., Muskie and others have been
raising the questions of RN's credibility. I would say: "Talk about
credibility; Ed Muskie, Hubert Humphrey and the other Democrats
were silent when Lyndon Johnson took us into war -- they relished in their
portrayals of Barry Goldwater as bomb-happy. Their silence while
Lyndon Johnson escalated the war is well known. Yet now they are
unanimous in their desire to cut and run. I would think that there is
a problem of credibility when candidates change their positions for
such obviously political purposes as the Democrats have done on
Vietnam -- and with hypocrisy turn around and accuse someone
else of credibility problems. "
Page 3
-- If an assessment is asked of the opposition, r re are
suggested brief replies:
Ed Muskie: Has the lead. A very undistinguishe 1 record;
virtually untutored in foreign affairs; indecisive. Will come under
strong attack from his opponents and will be then under heavy
testing as a candidate. While seeking to convey trust, he is as divisive
if not more so than any other Dems.
George McGovern: A loyal Dem who sincerely believes in
his leftish views. Not a serious candidate and a stalking horse
for Kennedy.
Gene McCarthy: Is a spoiler. Will further divide the Dems.
Will probably run a fourth party because he thinks the party does not
listen to him.
Henry Jackson: One of the brightest of the Dems; loyal, etc.
Must do well in Florida where he is more in tune with them than
Muskie. Unfortunately the Dems have gone to the left and will not
nominate him -- too bad that the Dems no longer believe in strong
national defense.
Hubert Humphrey: Muskie's chief rival -- will announce
January 10. Strong organization in Florida. May upset Muskie.
Will challenge Muskie in Wisconsin. Has more financial backing.
John Lindsay: How can he govern the country when he can't
govern his city? Many of his municipal problems were self-created.