Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
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 Patrick Buchanan to the President. RE: New Jersey victory of William Cahill analysis. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/15/1969

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
26146667
label
WHSF: Contested, 49-38
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146667
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 49-38
description
This file contains: From Patrick Buchanan to the President. RE: New Jersey victory of William Cahill analysis. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/15/1969
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146667
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
ba6062ba08667485
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library Contested Materials Collection Folder List Box Number Folder Number Document Date No Date Subject Document Type Document Description 49 38 12/15/1969 Campaign Memo From Patrick Buchanan to the President. RE: New Jersey victory of William Cahill analysis. 3pgs. Monday, June 04, 2012 Page 1 of 1 DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT] DOCUMENT DOCUMENT NUMBER TYPE SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS DATE RESTRICTION NI MEMO From Flaxigan to RN 12/4/69 C(NIXOR Re: Paris [47] N2 MEMO from Buckanan to RN 12/15/69 C(NIXON, [48] Re: Phillip's analysis w/2 capies attached N3 MEMO from Glanigan to RN 12/9/69 C(NIXD. [49] Re: Reused list I candidates 4 " N4 MEMO Capy of N3 (49] FILE GROUP TITLE BOX NUMBER POF 4 Presidents FOLDER TITLE Handwriting RESTRICTION Dec. CODES / three 15, 1969 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 la 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 D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.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 H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.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 Presidential Materials Review Board Review on Contested Documents Collection: President's Office Files Box Number: 4 Folder: President's Handwriting December 1 thru 15, 1969 Document Disposition 47 Retain Close Invasion of Privacy 48 Return Private/Political 49 Retain Close Invasion of Privacy THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON December 15, 1969 MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT Kevin Phillips has done a comprehensive analysis (attached) of the New Jersey victory of William Cahill. The following seem to be inescapable conclusions: 1. Cahill's massive victory (half a million votes ) was brought about by his stitching together the Nixon vote and the Wallace vote -- and adding Silent Majority disenchanted Catholic Democrats. 2. Despite prodigious efforts to make inroads into the black community in New Jersey, the Jewish community and the McCarthy suburbanites -- Cahill's gains were modest at best -- and can not possibly explain his 500, 000 vote margin, as compared with RN's 61,000 vote margin. (note: Where RN's percentage of the New Jersey black vote ran from eight to ten per cent; Cahill's percentage was some- where between 15 and 20 per cent. Since the total black vote is only one hundred thousand, this modest percentage increment cannot account for a tenth of Cahill's massive plurality. A similar situation exists among Jewish voters, where Cahill's modest increment over the President cannot explain any significant fraction of his half a million plurality.) 3. It was in those areas where Wallace ran quite strong Preservation Copy that, both in terms of percentage and total vote, Cahill outscored the President's totals by thousands and thousands of votes. Not only did Cahill in these areas get both the Nixon and Wallace vote -- but he got the Democratic vote that had been Wallace and had gone back to Humphrey. to 2 give Phillip when Frilay. he -2- CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: The Cahill race was considered by most observors to be a toss-up, a non-ideological contest between two men of rather close and largely liberal views. What made it a landslide were clearly the President's visit to New Jersey; probably as important or more important, the election eve speech, separating the country into the goats and The Great Silent Majority. We also believe that the direct appeal to the Catholic constituency (half of the Jersey electorate) was very helpful. In the three attached ads, especially the final one, run in Catholic diocesan newspapers went directly and unabashedly after the "Catholic" vote. Meyner (an apostate Catholic, a fact made known to the Catholic clerical community) attacked this approach and the GOP in New Jersey was squeamish about it until the returns came in. Where is Cahill's victory? Half of New Jersey voters are Catholic; RN got 35 per cent of them, Wallace 10 per cent of them -- and Cahill 60 per cent of them. As Senator Goldwater used to say, "It's as simple as that. 11 THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: It is crystal clear from the above where future victory for the President and the party in the Northeast lies. It lies in keeping the Republican party intact - - and in adding to it by the tens of thousands of "gut" conservative, predominantly Catholic, Silent Majority Democrats. Let the press squeal about a "Southern Strategy" all they wish. What they don't seem to realize is that in addition to adding Southern Protestants by the tens of thousands to the New Majority, we are making it a national one by adding as many Northern Catholics. However, the manner in which the Republican National Committee seems to allocate its minority resources reflects the reverse of the political realities as I see them. Preservation Copy Our Catholic division, set up last spring at the direction of the President and the request of the Committee of Six, consists today of one girl -- full-time as compared with the RNC's heavy and permanent black auxiliary. Now, we should not simply fire blacks and hire Catholics - but we should recognize, again, where the ducks are. Southern Protestants and Northern Catholics, predominantly months white, are to the missing elements this -1- of must - -3- in the Nixon Majority, waiting to join. (Note: Peter Flanigan's contacts with the Vatican seem to have been most beneficial; their press is good to the Administration; the Pope is effusive in his praise for the President; and all this is reflected in the American Catholic press.) What we would like is the President's blessing to continue with our project, to expand it within the RNC if we feel it is justified. (Harry Dent would be in on this decision.) With a good running start we should have, by the early fall of 1970, clearly identified all the national Catholic press: we should have expanded our contacts in the Catholic communications world; and we should know every district and every state: where a hard-sell Catholic approach can win over the swing votes. All of this experience and knowledge can be used in 1970 and put at the President's discretion in 1972. But we need a Presidential endorsement to cut through old ideas and new red tape. Done PATRICK J. BUCHANAN an Dentt follow the upp THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON December 15, 1969 MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT Kevin Phillips has done a comprehensive analysis (attached) of the New Jersey victory of William Cahill. The following seem to be inescapable conclusions: 1. Cahill's massive victory (half a million votes ) was brought about by his stitching together the Nixon vote and the Wallace vote and adding Silent Majority disenchanted Catholic Democrats. 2. Despite prodigious efforts to make inroads into the black community in New Jersey, the Jewish community and the McCarthy suburbanites Cahill's gains were modest at best and can not possibly explain his 500,000 vote margin, as compared with RN's 61,000 vote margin. (note: Where RN's percentage of the New Jersey black vote ran from eight to ten per cent; Cahill's percentage was some- where between 15 and 20 per cent. Since the total black vote is only one hundred thousand, this modest percentage increment cannot account for a tenth of Cahill's massive plurality. A similar situation exists among Jewish voters, where Cahill's modest increment over the President cannot explain any significant fraction of his half a million plurality.) 3. It was in those areas where Wallace ran quite strong that, both in terms of percentage and total vote, Cahill outscored the President's totals by thousands and thousands of votes. Not only did Cahill in these areas -- get both the Nixon and Wallace vote but he got the Democratic vote that had been Wallace and had gone back to Humphrey. give of he to Friday. -2- - CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: The Cahill race was considered by most observors to be a toss-up, a non-ideological contest between two men of rather close and largely liberal views. What made it a landslide were clearly the President's visit to New Jersey; probably as important or more important, the election eve speech, separating the country into the goats and The Great Silent Majority. We also believe that the direct appeal to the Catholic constituency (half of the Jersey electorate) was very helpful. In the three attached ads, especially the final one, run in Catholic diocesan newspapers went directly and unabashedly after the "Catholic" vote. Meyner (an apostate Catholic, a fact made known to the Catholic clerical community) attacked this approach and the GOP in New Jersey was squeamish about it until the returns came in. Where is Cahill's victory? Half of New Jersey voters are Catholic; RN got 35 per cent of them, Wallace 10 per cent of them -- and Cahill 60 per cent of them. As Senator Goldwater used to say, "It's as simple as that. 11 THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: It is crystal clear from the above where future victory for the President and the party in the Northeast lies. It lies in keeping the Republican party intact -- and in adding to it by the tens of thousands of "gut" conservative, predominantly Catholic, Silent Majority Democrats. Let the press squeal about a "Southern Strategy" all they wish. What they don't seem to realize is that in addition to adding Southern Protestants by the tens of thousands to the New Majority, we are making it a national one by adding as many Northern Catholics. However, the manner in which the Republican National Committee seems to allocate its minority resources reflects the reverse of the political realities as I see them. Our Catholic division, set up last spring at the direction of the President and the request of the Committee of Six, consists today of one girl full-time as compared with the RNC's heavy and permanent black auxiliary. Now, we should not simply fire blacks and hire Catholics but we should recognize, again, where the ducks are. Southern Protestants and Northern Catholics, predominantly months white, are the Consider missing elements this get H- of much -3- - in the Nixon Majority, waiting to join. (Note: Peter Flanigan's contacts with the Vatican seem to have been most beneficial; their press is good to the Administration; the Pope is effusive in his praise for the President; and all this is reflected in the American Catholic press.) What we would like is the President's blessing to continue with our project, to expand it within the RNC if we feel it is justified. (Harry Dent would be in on this decision.) With a good running start we should have, by the early fall of 1970, clearly identified all the national Catholic press: we should have expanded our contacts in the Catholic communications world; and we should know every district and every state: where a hard-sell Catholic approach can win over the swing votes. All of this experience and knowledge can be used in 1970 and put at the President's discretion in 1972. But we need a Presidential endorsement to cut through old ideas and new red tape. PATRICK J. BUCHANAN an Dentt