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 to Buchanan. RE: information about the early primaries. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/17/1971
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: the 1972 Democratic Primaries. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/3/1971
Author unknown. RE: outline of primaries after Wisconsin. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], no date
From Buchanan to RN. RE: filing deadlines for certain primaries in election. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/18/1971
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: the 1972 primaries and the Democrats. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/19/1971
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146587
label
WHSF: Contested, 48-57
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146587
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 48-57
description
This file contains:
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: information about the early primaries. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/17/1971
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: the 1972 Democratic Primaries. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/3/1971
Author unknown. RE: outline of primaries after Wisconsin. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], no date
From Buchanan to RN. RE: filing deadlines for certain primaries in election. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/18/1971
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: the 1972 primaries and the Democrats. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/19/1971
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146587
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
59d3eb817b7f4708
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
48
57
12/17/1971
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE:
information about the early primaries. 1 pg.
48
57
12/3/1971
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: the 1972
Democratic Primaries. 3 pgs.
48
57
>
Campaign
Memo
Author unknown. RE: outline of primaries
after Wisconsin. 3 pgs.
48
57
10/18/1971
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN. RE: filing deadlines
for certain primaries in election. 4 pgs.
Thursday, June 04, 2015
Page 1 of 2
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
48
57
11/19/1971
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan. RE: the 1972
primaries and the Democrats. 9 pgs.
Thursday, June 04, 2015
Page 2 of 2
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
NUMBER
TYPE
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
DATE
RESTRICTION
N-1
Memo
Khachigian to Buchanan re:
12/17/71
C
[DOC 161]
(Nixon)
[ Crossover voting] 1p.
memo
Khachigian to Buchanan re:
IL/E/CI
C
N - 2
(Niton)
[Doc 162]
The 1972 Democratic Primaries,
page 3pp. with Attachment
N-3:
N-3
Altachmatt/
TAB B: A Rough Outline
n.d.
C
Report
[Doc 186]
of the Primaries after
(Nixon)
Wisconsin, 3pp.
Buchanan to the President
10/18/71
C
N-4
Memo
[Doc 163]
re. [Democratic Primaries]
(Nixon)
4 pp , including 'p List of
States and Primary filing
deadlines
Khachigian to Buchana re: The
11/19/71
C
N-5
Memo
(N.Xon
1972 P.- -maries and the Deinocrats
[Doc 164]
app.
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
:
27
FOLDER TITLE
172 Primaries
RESTRICTION CODES
A. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.
E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
B. National security classified information.
financial information.
C. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's
F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law
rights.
enforcement purposes.
D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy
G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.
or a libel of a living person.
H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
NA FORM 1421 (4-85)
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
NUMBER
TYPE
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
DATE
RESTRICTION
N-6
memo
Khachigian to Buchanan
10/20/71
C
[Doc 165]
re: [Declaration of Candidacy]
(Nixon)
IP.
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
MINUMIEAN
27
FOLDER TITLE
172 Primaries
RESTRICTION CODES
A. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.
E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
B. National security classified information.
financial information.
C. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's
F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law
rights.
enforcement purposes.
D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy
G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.
or a libel of a living person.
H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
NA FORM 1421 (4-85)
Presidential Materials Review Board
Review on Contested Documents
Collection: Kenneth L. Khachigian
Box Number:
27
Folder:
'72 Primaries
Document
Disposition
161
Return Private/Political
162
Return
Private/Political
163
Return
Private/Political
164
Return
Private/Political
165
Retain
Open
186
Return Private/Political
, MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DETERMINED TO BE AN
December 17, 1971
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12065, Section 6-102
By
RY
NARS, Date 2-13-81
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM: KENNETH L. KHACHIGIAN Ve
Here is some basic information you wanted on the early pri-
maries. Basically, it involves crossover voting and the like.
In New Hampshire, an individual has to vote on their party's
ballot. Once they declare their party affiliation, they must vote on
that ballot. They can write in names of other party candidates, but
those votes don't count towards delegate apportionment. Note that
in New Hampshire independents may vote in either party's primary.
Pete McCloskey is getting the kids to register as independents
to do this very thing.
In Florida, once a person is registered in a party, he can't
vote in the other party's primary.
In Illinois when the person goes to vote, he signs an affidavit
declaring whether he is a Dem or Republican and he gets that
party's ballot and he can vote only on that ballot.
In Wisconsin, there is no registration. People go to the polls,
get two ballots (one Republican and one Dem). They vote on one
ballot and throw the other away. Thus, crossover voting is essen-
tially allowed and it may be in our interest to have Republicans vote
on the Dem ballot for HHH.
Note: per your question on whether we are O.K. in Illinois, I
checked with Magruder. Jeb said everything is under control and
that all districts will have slates running pledged to RN. Our
machinery is deciding which delegates are running, and there is no
chance that McCloskey (or Ashbrook) can slip in slates to beat us --
at least those chances have been minimized. All voting is for district
delegates and there is not a statewide vote for a particular candidate.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
December 3, 1971
By
E.O. Ry 12065, Section 6-102
NARS, Date 2-13-81
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM: KENNETH L. KHACHIGIAN 76
SUBJECT: THE 1972 DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES
While it's not possible to make a rock-hard prediction of the full
primary route for the Democrats, I think we have enough information
to look at the first four big ones and give some idea of the scenario
through Wisconsin.
The New Hampshire primary falls on March 7 - - after the with-
drawal deadlines for Illinois, Florida and Wisconsin. Thus, anyone
going into New Hampshire will at least have to go into Wisconsin and
Florida (where Secretary of States have discretion as to who goes on
the ballot) and possibly into Illinois (where the primary is opening up
this year).
NEW HAMPSHIRE
New Hampshire is Muskie's. Jackson has pulled out because the
polls showed him with nothing. That leaves Yorty and McGovern who
at this point will be Muskie's only opponents. The key here is to insist
that Muskie must do better than RN's 1968 showing to call New Hampshire
a victory. Yorty will get around 20% with Bill Loeb's endorsement and
McGovern a hard-core 15% based on some polling recently reported.
FLORIDA
I believe at this point that Florida is going to be an indecisive
primary -- but one that still benefits Muskie. The Florida ballot will
probably include: Muskie, McGovern, Jackson, Shirley Chisholm,
George Wallace, Sam Yorty, Hubert Humphrey, John Lindsay and
Eugene McCarthy.
Page 2
The big story in Florida will probably be the poor showing of
Scoop Jackson. It's long been my feeling -- supported most recently
by Evans-Novak and several polls -- that Jackson is going nowhere.
In Florida, his appeal will be lost under Wallace's frank hard-line
appeals in the northern part of the state.
Shirley Chisholm, McGovern, Lindsay and McCarthy will split the
libs and blacks in Florida. Humphrey will probably have a small bloc
by virtue of his endorsement by Miami mayor David Kennedy, Yorty
a fringe, and Muskie picking up 25-35% -- enough for a close margin
of victory. If there's no big victory there for Muskie, at least there's
no great loss either.
ILLINOIS
Illinois is opening up its primary for the first time allowing
presidential hopefuls to have their names alongside the candidates
for convention delegates in each Congressional district. No one has
yet planned to run anybody in opposition to the delegates in Chicago
still Daley's. But both McGovern and Muskie plan to run delegates in
other districts and conceivably could pick up about as many delegates
as will Daley. Yet, I can't picture Daley giving up total control of his
delegation and thus think that he wi 11 try to get a majority so he still
has control in Miami. Nevertheless, Muskie has an excellent oppor-
tunity to get committed to him upwards of 35% of the Illinois delegation.
WISCONSIN
All early primaries eventually lead to Wisconsin on April 4 where
the Secretary of State has discretion as to who goes on the ballot and
affidavits of non-candidacy are required to get off the ballot.
It looks promising for Muskie right now. McGovern, Lindsay and
McCarthy will all probably be on the ballot along with Humphrey, Jackson
and Shirley Chisholm. The liberals will again divide the kids and the left.
Humphrey has some residual strength in Wisconsin but surely not enough
to win more than one or two districts. Jackson has no source of strength
in Wisconsin and I call it a wash for Scoop.
So again, it looks like Muskie, with at least one article I read giving
him as many as 8 out of 10 districts. He will, of course, have great
strength in Milwaukee and wherever else large Polish enclaves exist.
Plus, there is something about the solid Ed image that sells in Wisconsin.
Page 3
A Wisconsin victory for Muskie, added to earlier leads in the
first primaries makes a solid position for Big Ed going into the
others. It will really almost go by default to the extent that his
opponents will not be able to muster significant showings through
Wisconsin. And if no large candidate emerges to oppose him, Muskie
will reap enormous psychological victories in Wisconsin, probably
loosen up some money, and be on his way to other primaries.
After Wisconsin, a brand new analysis will be necessary. Things
will have changed sufficiently to let us make some final plans. More
will then be known about EMK and we can start giving some thought to
the Southern primaries as well as Oregon and California.
Please note, per Tab A, that the various dates of the primaries still
makes them crowded and hopefully confused enough SO that even though
Muskie is winning, he won't have the nomination locked up via the pri-
maries and that a bloody Miami is still possible. For example, the
Florida primary comes after the withdrawal deadlines for Illinois,
Rhode Island, Massachusetts (subject to change), Pennsylvania, Wis-
consin, and Nebraska.
And by the Wisconsin primary, the withdrawal deadlines for
Nebraska, Tennessee, Indiana, South Dakota, North Carolina and
Maryland will have passed. Thus, every one of those primaries are
likely to be littered with names even if candidates are withdrawing
after Wisconsin. And it's to our benefit to keep those primaries
crowded (even to the extent of asking Republican Secretaries of State
to keep Democrats on the ballot) SO as to make each of Muskie's
victories indecisive.
My recommendation: Higher ups should give some immediate
attention to this information and sanction our ongoing analysis here.
No one really seems to be giving serious attention to what is happening
in the other camp (at least in terms of slogging through all the state
laws), yet what happens with the Dems is, for now, equally important
as what happens to us.
TAB B
A ROUGH OUTLINE OF THE PRIMARIES AFTER WISCONSIN
Rhode Island follows Wisconsin and is insignificant in size and
impact. Massachusetts, for now, is scheduled next. Governor Sargent
recently vetoed a bill which would have given EMK control over his
delegation, and now it is winner take all, making the big delegation
a valuable one. Our intelligence, however, shows that EMK's people
are introducing new legislation which would push the filing deadline
into March instead of February, thus giving Teddy maneuvering room
should he want to run. If he does, he will go after Massachusetts first
and have a good start towards the nomination.
Pennsylvania now is a district by district vote, but their law is in
the legislature, and it still might change. It's hard to guess what will
happen considering the expected fight between Shapp, Rizzo and the
machine boys, and we still simply don't have enough information to
make a prediction.
Indiana comes next on May 2 and is marginally important.
Vance Hartke is talking about running, and if so, will cause the
others problems. Lindsay has been there and he may get Gordon St.
Angelo's support and try for a comeback after Wisconsin aiming at
the constituency that made RFK popular in 1968. It's too early to call.
Ohio is also on May 2, but a Gilligan favorite son bid is pre- -
dicted which will limit the impact. Look for Gilligan getting his
fingers burned a la Jim Rhodes.
North Carolina is also on May 2, and that could be a most im-
portant primary vis 'a vis the South. Moreover, Tennessee follows
North Carolina on May 4. Together, these two primaries will tell
a great story for us and might be Scoop's last gasp.
North Carolina and Tennessee are important to those candidates
who intend to take more of a centrist Dem line the old FDR
coalition. Muskie, Jackson, Mills, Chisholm and Wallace will
probably grace those ballots. Lindsay and McGovern have no choice
but to go on the Tennessee ballot if they are in Wisconsin (secretary
of state discretion). Humphrey may be there as well, and he needs
a good showing to be credible.
Muskie's support is good in North Carolina, and Scoop is devoting
great attention there. But Wallace will give them headaches as he
will in Tennessee, and William Anderson might be in Tennessee to
confuse things. I give North Carolina to Muskie the right being
split by Wallace, Jackson and Mills if they are all there. Chisholm
will take the blacks and some liberals and McGovern might get 10 votes.
Page 2
If Muskie wins North Carolina after having won Wisconsin, he
has a strong argument for saying he does well in all sections of the
country - - it will help him immensely.
Tennessee's too hard to call right now. Muskie's organization
and strength there is not legend, and Wallace will have strong support.
Tennessee will most likely have on its ballot all those who were on the
Florida ballot and maybe more. That makes it look more like Florida -
a toss-up with little national impact and no convincing delegate support
picked up.
Note: Wallace should not be discouraged in these primaries
because he will detract from the others. Keeping Muskie's margin
down in the South is important.
Nebraska, West Virginia, and Maryland are the next three, but
are hardly kingmaker in character. Nebraska will be the most con-
tentious with a heavy ballot, but who will pay attention with Oregon
two weeks away?
Finally, to Oregon, where everyone will be on the ballot. They
can't get off. Even Teddy will probably be on that ballot. This could
be a fun and games primary. Even if Teddy decides he wants in, he's
not all that popular in Oregon (cf. McCarthy VS. RFK in '68), and he's
way behind Muskie in the polls. In fact, Muskie is leading with an
extremely comfortable margin in Oregon.
Now Oregon is supposed to be Scoop's back yard, but he's not
doing too hot there, running last in recent poll. The vote will be split
every which way, and right now I pick Muskie even if he only gets 40%.
That won't hurt him, because he will have come into Oregon with a
substantially successful primary record. Oregon can only be the saving
grace for other candidates - - maybe Lindsay or Jackson, or even
McCarthy again. But don't count on it. The final prize is in California.
If there is any hunger for the nomination by any Democrat, he
will go into California with every thing he's got. California is "winner
take all." That's why Humphrey has really made serious moves there,
and why I think he is going to make California his make or break state.
He has financial backing and old ties there. And while the cats are away,
HHH just might make some headway stumping the Golden state.
Page 3
But it's not that easy. Lindsay will probably make one last fling
in California. Muskie will pour on the steam. Jackson, by now will
have lost his taste. I predict he'll be out by California (remember,
you saw it here first). McGovern can't pass up California if he's come
this far (unless Teddy goes for it). McCarthy shouldn't be expected
to do too much there. The real light is EMK. The filing deadline is
March 24 enough to get off ballots in other states, but to get in
California. If Wisconsin makes it look like the liberals have had it
but that RN still might be beatable, then EMK might swoop up the
Kennedy torch and run for daylight.
Without Kennedy, California becomes fair Muskie game.
Humphrey could make a good showing, and Lindsay and McGovern
will split the left. I would again pick Muskie. If Kennedy is in,
I give the state and all its delegates to him.
The last three primaries, New Mexico, South Dakota and New
Jersey are on the same day as California, June 6. All attention
will be on California and those other three states will just be a
matter of who splits the delegates.
What this all means is that Muskie goes into convention with the
most primary delegates and the best showing in the primaries. But
it will be the delegates not selected in the primaries and the delegates
controlled by favorite sons that still hold the balance at the convention.
At that time all the IOU's will come in.
The important thing for Muskie is his primary momentum and his
ability to something decent in the South. If he showed this, I think he
has the nomination. But I don't think he will get it on the first ballot.
I think there will be hedging on the first ballot with a comfortable lead
to Muskie. But even if it takes two or three ballots, it still comes out
Muskie.
That's the scenario I see now, but it can change tomorrow. I
repeat: On the morning of April 5, I think we can make more solid
judgments on how things will look from there. But until then, we are
going on gut instincts.
This information needs to be digested and periodically reviewed.
Thought must be given to what we want our Republican Secretaries
of State to do in the various states. And finally, an ongoing strategy
to exacerbate Democratic differences has to be evolved out of what
we know.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
October 18, 1971
By
E.O. B1 12065, Section 6-102
NARS, Date 2-13-81
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
Kevin Phillips has called to my attention a most interesting fact which
should cloud, to some degree, the Democratic primaries, and which seems
on the surface to strengthen the hand of Senator Muskie. The fact:
The filing deadline for no fewer than 13 primaries falls on or before the
date when the Florida primary takes place. In no fewer than six of these
13 primaries -- Presidential candidates are (Wisconsin, North Carolina,
Tennessee, Nebraska, Oregon, as well as Florida) or can be (Pennsylvania)
filed without permission of the candidate himself.
In all these six primaries, the names filed in the Presidential primary
are those of "generally advocated and national recognized" Presidential
candidates. What does this mean:
a)
Anyone active in the Florida primary for the Presidential nomination
(as of now probably Chisholm, Jackson, Muskie, Lindsay, McGovern,
Wallace and Harris) is almost certainly going to be filed in all those other
six or seven primaries as well -- since Florida comes after the filing
deadlines of all of them, and since they will be "active" candidates when
that deadline passes.
b)
Lindsay and Chisholm and McGovern and the left candidates do not
have any "choice" as to whether they go into Tennessee, North Carolina
and Nebraska. If they go into Florida -- then they will automatically be
"filed" in the others; and Lindsay and Chisholm and McGovern will surely
wind up with a string of ignominious defeats before they get to Oregon.
c)
The likelihood is high then, that the primaries are going to be
something of a mess, and that secondary candidates -- even when
eliminated -- cannot help but have their names dragged through until at
least after Oregon.
-2-
d)
Unless Pete McCloskey withdraws immediately after New Hampshire --
he will automatically be filed in Tennessee (March 9 filing deadline),
Nebraska (March.10) and Oregon (March 14) -- where it is certain he will
be administered a massive defeat. Even if McCloskey does well in New
Hampshire (say 15%-30%), it would seem that he himself could see this
as his apogee, and then "stand down" immediately saying he had made
his point -- instead of taking his inevitable bad beatings in the Tennessee
and Nebraska primaries, even before Oregon.
e)
In both Oregon and Nebraska, just who is on the ballot is the sole
decision of the Secretary of State. In both cases, he is a Republican
(Clay Myers of Oregon, up in 1972) and Alan J. Beermann in Nebraska).
We should decide ourselves just who we want filed in the Democratic
primaries -- do we want "George" or not in the Democratic primaries --
and then get the word to these Secretaries of State.
f)
Without having done much analysis, I would thi at this point that
Muskie whose strength is much broader, whose recognition is wider, would
be the beneficiary of these cluttered primaries, or perhaps Jackson -- if
Wallace is kept out.
But if Muskie, as the centrist, between the extremes, as the front-runner
and best-known wins in all these contests, he is going to build considerable
momentum for a victory in California, which would cinch his nomination,
as of now, it seems to me.
g)
If the left takes a string of beatings as it seems Harris, McGovern,
Lindsay and Chisholm will certainly do in the "mandatory primaries" of
Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Tennessee and Nebraska -- before
Oregon even comes up on May 23 -- it would seem thatby the time of
Oregon they would be forced to unite behind one of their number in Oregon --
or get whipped again. The "drubbing" of the left, which would seem
inherent in the shaping up of these primaries, might well produce the
kind of bitterness that would result in a fourth party.
(Note: If Lindsay is doing the same analysis as here, it would seem almost
certain that he would want to hang back until after the Florida deadline,
February 10, to announce. Also, Hubert would seem to have a vested
interest in staying out of these "mandatory" primaries, where he, too,
would see likely to get beat. But if Hubert wants to go into Wisconsin
(filing deadline January 31), he has to go into all of the six'mandatory"
primaries, since all their deadlines come after Florida.
-3- -
h)
The California deadline is April 7. By the only New Hampshire
Florida, Illinois and Wisconsin will have taken place -- Wisconsin just
three days before!
At this point, the Left -- in the persons of Harris, Chisholm, McGovern
and Lindsay -- will have to decide whether they will go into the California
primary. As will Edward M. Kennedy. If both Kennedy and Lindsay go,
of course, that makes for a split in the Left vote, and perhaps or probably
a victory for Muskie.
The above is a very sketchy analysis based on the deadlines for filing and
the dates of the primaries themselves. At this point in time, it seems to
me we should have an experienced, professional analyst looking over
these maze of dates and regulations in the primaries, to give us some
kind of accurate scenario over what each candidate is likely to do -- in
light of them.
Buchanan
CC:
Attorney General Mitchell
H. R. Haldeman
Primary
Filing
State
Date
State
Deadline
New Hampshire
March 7
Illinois
January 3
Florida
March 14
Wisconsin
January 31
Illinois
March 21
Rhode Island
January 31
Wisconsin
April 4
Ohio
February 2
Rhode Island
April 11
New Hampshire
February 3
Massachusetts
April 25
West Virginia
February 5
Pennsylvania
April 25
Florida
February 10
District of Columbia
May 2
Pennsylvania
February 15
8R
Indiana
May 2
Massachusetts
February
Ohio
May 2
North Carolina
March 7
North Carolina
May 2
Tennessee
March 9
Tennessee
May 4
Nebraska
March 10
Nebraska
May 9
Oregon
March 14
West Virginia
May 9
District of Columbia
March 18
Maryland
May 16
Indiana
March 23
Oregon
May 23
Maryland
March 24
California
June 6
California
April 7
New Mexico
June 6
New Mexico
April 7
South Dakota
June 6
South Dakota
April 22
New Jersey
June 6
New Jersey
April 29
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12065, Section 6-102
November 19, 1971
By RM NARS, Date 2-13-81
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM: KENNETH L. KHACHIGIAN
SUBJECT: THE 1972 PRIMARIES AND THE DEMOCRATS
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
Candidates have a filing deadline of February 3 for a primary on
March 7. To get out, the candidate must withdraw within 10 days of
receipt of cardidacy, i.e. by February 13 (assuming the filing is
complete on February 3). This leaves enough time to also file an
affidavit taking his name off the ballot in Florida (which has a with-
drawal deadline of noon, February 15).
So, for example, if McGovern sputters and wants out after New
Hampshire, he can do it in time to get his name off the Florida ballot
and almost all the others as well.
New Hampshire Secretary of State -- Republican -- Robert L. Sturk
FLORIDA:
Candidates are placed on the ballot by a bipartisan committee --
selecting generally advocated and nationally recognized candidates for the
office of President. February 10 is the filing deadline and noon,
February 15 is the deadline for filing their withdrawal affidavit. The
primary date is March 14.
Assume someone is on the ballot in Florida and sticks it out
through election day on March 14. This will commit him to the Wis-
consin, Nebraska and Oregon primaries for sure. It will also commit
him to the Illinois, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania
primaries if he had filed for them and possibly to the North Carolina
primary (a strange primary which is outlined below).
Page 2
What this means is that as early as Florida, candidates
will be committing themselves weeks ahead, unable to avoid
at least having their names on some more ballots.
Florida Secretary of State -- Democrat -- Richard B. Stone
ILLINOIS:
The information is sketchy right now, but in essence Illinois is
now going to allow persons running for the Convention delegation to
have listed next to their names the name of their favored Presidential
candidate. The delegates are elected out of Congressional districts.
Daley will run his slate "uncommitted" delegates (though
committed to him) in at least the seven districts in Chicago. As for
now, only McGovern and Muskie have indicated running their people
in other districts -- Muskie in perhaps 16 and McGovern in perhaps
a dozen.
The Illinois primary is before Wisconsin and after Florida. The
filing deadline is January 3 and the withdrawal of a candidate must come
by January 8. So a candidate could pull out of Illinois without committing
into the other primaries.
I can't imagine Daley giving up anything in Illinois if he can help
it. I would guess that he will try to control at least a majority of the
delegation, thus squeezing out some of the other candidates. It really
all depends on Daley. If he doesn't try to pick up all the marbles, then
Illinois becomes a fairly important primary. There will be too many
delegates to pass up.
Illinois Secretary of State Republican John W. Lewis
WISCONSIN:
The filing deadline is January 31, and the candidates will be
placed on the ballot by an ll-man bipartisan committee -- selecting
all nationally recognized candidates. Then the candidates - if they
want out must file an affidavit of withdrawal by February 29 for the
primary on April 4.
Page 3
If a candidate sticks it out through the Wisconsin primary he is
committed to having his name on the ballot in Tennessee, Nebraska,
Maryland and Oregon (all states where names are put on the ballot
at state's discretion), and in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Pennsyl-
vania, and Indiana if they have previously filed in those states. All
these states have withdrawal deadlines before the Wisconsin primary.
My guess is that virtually all the hopefuls will stick it out
through Wisconsin, hoping they will catch fire somewhere. This is
perfect for us because then it commits them to at least being on the
ballot in four more states -- Tennessee being the most important
addition since Florida even if they no longer profess candidacy.
Wisconsin Secretary of State -- Republican -- Robert Zimmerman.
PENNSYLVANIA:
The primary is on April 25 with a filing deadline of February 15.
The withdrawal deadline to get off the ballot is February 22.
A candidate may be nominated via petition in order to have his
name placed on the ballot, and his consent is not required. Only
some delegates are elected in the primary. I doubt that any
candidate's name will be entered there without his consent. However,
some candidates may choose to run there without publicly consenting.
For example, I can envision Humphrey having his name entered in the
Pennsylvania primary while publicly disavowing it. It would be a
logical place for Humphrey because of the strong old-line machine
which could get the vote out for him.
I have a gut feeling, however, that Humphrey will be in most of
the primaries from Florida onward and if he does marginally well,
he may pull out all the stops for the last primaries on June 6 California,
South Dakota, New Jersey and New Mexico.
Pennsylvania Secretary of State -- Democrat C. Delores Tucker
INDIANA:
Primary is on May 2; the filing deadline is March 23. A person
getting on the Indiana ballot must withdraw by March 27th to get off.
Thus they can get off after the New Hampshire and Florida primaries,
but not after the Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Massachusetts or Pennsyl-
vania primaries.
Indiana Secretary of State -- Democrat Larry Conrad
Page 4
OHIO:
The Ohio primary is May 2 and the filing deadline is February 2.
A candidate must withdraw if he wishes "any reasonable time before
the ballots are printed. 11 That is subject to interpretation, and there
is no telling how that withdrawal date would come down.
However, I don't consider Ohio crucial at this time. John
Gilligan is going to play the James Rhodes game and run as a favorite
son and control the delegation. I don't foresee him opening it up to
the others. He obviously wants to broker what he can in Miami.
Maybe he will learn what Rhodes did - you can sometimes get your
fingers burned doing this.
Secretary of State -- Republican -- Ted W. Brown
NORTH CAROLINA:
The North Carolina State Board of Elections will list the generally
advocated individuals on the Presidential ballot by February 21. To get
off the ballot in North Carolina does not require any action. To the
contrary, in order to stay on, the candidate must file a notice of
candidacy and $1000. If the $1000 is not given within 15 days of listing
of candidacy, their name will be withdrawn.
The conclusion in North Carolina is simple; it really becomes like
the other primaries to the extent that any candidate who does not want
to get on the ballot there will not, even if he is a candidate in some
other state. And by this reasoning, we simply cannot tell in advance
with any degree of certainty who will be on the ballot. So scratch
North Carolina as one of those primaries where certain candidates
have to run.
North Carolina Secretary of State Democrat Thad Eure
TENNESSEE:
Another state where the names will go on the ballot at the discretion
of the Secretary of State. This will be done by March 9 for a May 4
primary. To get out of the Tennessee primary, a non-candidacy affidavit
must be filed 10 days after March 9 which would allow time to get off
this ballot after the Florida primary.
Of interest in Tennessee is the possible candidacy of Congressman
William Anderson (of Tiger Cage fame). Wilbur Mills might take a
Page 5
crack, and old George will surely file in Tennessee. Note that
Wallace is talking about going into both Dem and Republican pri-
maries, and I have no doubt he will. It could be rough for us as well
as for the Dems.
I consider Tennessee along with North Carolina as important
Southern and border primaries -- for us as well as the Dems. The
showings in those two states may well tell us what kind of strengths
the eventual nominees are going to have in the South and border states.
Tennessee Secretary of State -- Democrat -- Joe C. Carr
OREGON:
Oregon is the next big primary, coming on May 23 with a filing
deadline of 5:00 p.m. March 14. The names will be placed on the
ballot by the Secretary of State at his discretion. The key thing about
Oregon this time is that a candidate cannot withdraw his name from
the ballot even with an affidavit.
My guess is that Oregon is going to be chock full of Democrats - -
most of them having been committed there simply by having appeared
on the Wisconsin and Florida ballots.
Note that a research firm in Oregon found Scoop Jackson running
behind Muskie, McGovern, McCarthy, Kennedy and Humphrey. Jackson
was getting 7.8% a poor last. That's interesting because Oregon
is Scoop's back yard in the same way that New Hampshire is Muskie's
back yard. It may cause us to reassess the Jackson strength. Moreover,
Teddy Kennedy's weakness in Oregon may also urge us to get him on
the ballot there where he can 't get off.
Oregon Secretary of State -- Republican -- Clay Myers
CALIFORNIA:
The primary date is June 6 and the filing deadline for candidacy
is April 7. Once a candidate gets on the ballot he cannot withdraw - -
making two big primary states in a row where the candidate cannot
withdraw.
California Secretary of State -- Democrat Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
Page 6
OBSERVATIONS:
I think it is inadvisable to predict right now how the various pri-
maries will boil down. I think by the time of the Florida primary, we
should be able to make some better judgments. However, in the
meantime, some logical scenarios can be drawn up.
New Hampshire will be a throwaway one way or the other. If
Muskie wins big, it doesn't mean much. However, I don't think his
margin will be too high, and that he will be bloodied up somewhat.
Yorty will blast him from the right and McGovern from the left.
Jackson's presence in New Hampshire likelv will do little more than
establish some name identity for him. Bill Loeb will support Yorty.
Florida might well be indecisive with the winner getting 25-35%
of the vote and Wallace being right up there with a chunk of the Florida
primary. Some of this might depend on a loyalty oath, but then such
things never held back old Gawg. With McGovern, Chisholm, Jackson,
Lindsay, Muskie, McCarthy and now probably Humphrey in the show,
Florida will be a toss-up. No decisive victories in Florida, unless
Wallace comes through with a win on the strength of Northern Florida.
Illinois will not be a crucial primary because I think Daley is smart
enough to do what he can to control most of the voting for delegates.
But Wisconsin is the next one, and that, I believe, becomes the first
serious primary where we can start perceiving a trend. And right
now, I think it looks promising for Muskie. McGovern, Lindsay and
McCarthy will all probably be on the ballot. Throw in Shirley Chisholm
and that just totally confuses the left. Jackson is nowhere in Wisconsin,
and that leaves most of the chips for Big Ed (though it has been noted
that HHH might start his big push in Wisconsin).
Muskie can concede Madison and some other areas to the left, but
I see most of the rest going to him especially the ethnic rich
Milwaukee area. Humphrey might be the main problem right now,
but I don't think Hubert will make much of an effect in Wisconsin. If
Muskie does well in Wisconsin, money will loosen up, and he may try
to get a bandwagon psychology going for him.
Rhode Island is insignificant and Massachusetts primary law is
now perfectly suited for Teddy to control the delegation. The Massachu-
setts primary is now moot.
Page 7
Pennsylvania is next, and it is a district by district type of thing.
It depends just how much Shapp can control his own show which I
doubt very much because of Rizzo. With all the battling, no one is going
to pick up anything of significance in Pennsylvania. No bets there.
That brings us to Indiana, which holds its primary on May 2nd.
Indiana is of marginal importance. It could be the state where Lindsay.
tries to revive himself after a setback in Wisconsin. He may get the
support of Gordon St. Angelo, and if he does, he'll aim for the same
constituency that made RFK popular in Indiana. I expect that Jackson,
Muskie and some others will also be in Indiana, but it just simply is not
a central primary state.
Ohio is also on May 2, but I see a Gilligan favorite son bid, and
thus no real action in Ohio -i.e., one with no psychological impact
on the other races.
But North Carolina is also on May 2, and that could be a very
important primary vis 'a vis the South. Moreover, Tennessee
follows North Carolina on May 4. Together, these two primaries
will tell a great story for us. It may be one of the last gasps for our
friend Scoop.
North Carolina and Tennessee are important to those candidates
who intend to take more of a centrist Democrat line -- the old Roosevelt
coalition and maybe the Kefauver rhetoric. Muskie, Jackson, Mills,
Chisholm, and Wallace will almost certainly be on these ballots. Lindsay
and McGovern will have to be on the Tennessee ballot if they go through
Wisconsin - they have no choice. Humphrey, I would guess, should
try to make some showing in one of these states to prove he has some
appeal to the South.
Muskie has good support in North Carolina, and Scoop has been
spending a great deal of time there. But George Wallace is going to
be there to give them all headaches as he will in Tennessee. And
William Anderson might be in Tennessee to confuse things -- especially
in his home district.
I think Muskie would win North Carolina the right will be split
by Jackson, Wallace, and Mills, if he's there. Shirley Chisholm will
take the Blacks and some liberals and McGovern may get 10 votes there
if he sticks with it. If Muskie wins North Carolina after having won
Wisconsin, he has a strong argument for saying that he can do well in
all sections of the country. This helps his road to the nomination
immensely. It's too hard to call Tennessee right now. But Muskie's
Page 8
organization and strength there is not legend, and George Wallace
might be the big story there. The trouble with Tennessee is that
every soul on the Wisconsin ballot goes on the Tennessee ballot and
that makes it start looking more like Florida a toss-up with little
national impact and no one picking up convincing delegate strength.
Nebraska, West Virginia, and Maryland are hardly kingmaker
states. Those are the next three primaries, and I don't expect they
will titillate Eric Sevareid. Anyway, Mandel will probably call the
shots in the Maryland primary -- at least he's trying.
Finally, to Oregon, where everyone will be on the ballot. They
can't get off. Even Teddy will probably be on that ballot. This could
be a fun and games primary. Even if Teddy decides he wants in, he's
not all that popular in Oregon (cf. McCarthy vs. RFK in '68), and he's
way behind Muskie in the polls. In fact, Muskie is leading with an
extremely comfortable margin in Oregon.
Now Oregon is supposed to be Scoop's back yard, but he's not
doing too hot there. The vote will be split every which way, and
right now I pick Muskie even if he only gets 40%. That won't hurt
him, because he will have come into Oregon with a substantially
successful primary record. Oregon can only be the saving grace for
other candidates maybe Lindsay or Jackson, or even McCarthy
again. But don't count on it. The real prize is in California.
If there is any hunger for the nomination by any Democrat, he
will go into California with every thing he's got. That's why Humphrey
has really made serious moves there, and why I think he is going to
make California his make or break state. He has financial backing
and old ties there. And while the cats are away, HHH just might
make some headway stumping the Golden state.
But it's not that easy. Lindsay will probably make one last fling
in California. Muskie will pour on the steam. Jackson, by now will
have lost his taste. I think he'll be out by California. McGovern
can't pass up California if he's come this far (unless Teddy goes for it).
McCarthy shouldn't be expected to do too much there. The real light
is EMK. The filing deadline is April 7 three days after Wisconsin.
If Wisconsin makes it look like the liberals have had it but that RN
still might be beatable, then EMK might swoop up the Kennedy torch
and run for daylight.
Page 9
Without Kennedy, California becomes fair Muskie game.
Humphrey could make a good showing, and Lindsay and McGovern
will split the left. I would again pick Muskie. If Kennedy is in,
I give the state and all its delegates to him.
The last three primaries, New Mexico, South Dakota and
New Jersey are on the same day as California, June 6. All attention
will be on California and those other three states will just be a
matter of who splits the delegates.
What this all means is that Muskie goes into convention with
the most primary delegates and the best showing in the primaries.
But it will be the delegates not selected in the primaries and the
delegates controlled by favorite sons that still hold the balance at
the convention. At that time all the IOU's will come in.
The important thing for Muskie is his primary momentum and
his ability to something decent in the South. If he showed this, I think
he has the nomination. But I don't think he will get it on the first
ballot. I think there will be hedging on the first ballot with a com-
fortable lead io Muskie. But even if it takes two or three ballots,
it still comes out Muskie.
That's the scenario I see now, but it can change tomorrow. I
repeat: On the morning of April 5, I think we can make some solid
judgments on how things will look from there. But until then, we
are going on gut instincts.
This information needs to be digested and periodically reviewed.
Thought must be given to what we want our Republican Secretaries
of State to do in the various states. And finally, an ongoing strategy
to exacerbate Democratic differences has to be evolved out of what
we know.
CONFIDENTIAL