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 Paul W. Keyes to Robert Finch RE: Opinion of Campaign. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 11/4/1970
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146765
label
WHSF: Contested, 50-31
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146765
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 50-31
description
This file contains:
From Paul W. Keyes to Robert Finch RE: Opinion of Campaign. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 11/4/1970
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146765
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e2bd7e3cddef633b
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
50
31
11/4/1970
Campaign
Letter
From Paul W. Keyes to Robert Finch RE:
Opinion of Campaign. 4pgs.
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Page 1 of 1
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
DATE
RESTRICTION
NUMBER
TYPE
N-1
Letter
Paul W. Keyes to Robert Funch
11/4/70
comps
[Doc 110]
re: opinion of campaign
[allached to cover slip, "Ile
1970 Campaign "]
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
PPF
23
FOLDER TITLE
Camyaign 1970
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G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.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H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.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: President's Personal Files
Box Number:
23
Folder:
Campaign 1970
Document
Disposition
110
Return Private/Political
PAUL W. KEYES PRODUCTIONS
Incorporated
10000 RIVERSIDE DRIVE, TOLUCA LAKE, CALIFORNIA 91602 766-9505
November 4, 1970
Dear Bob:
Earlier today I chatted very briefly with Don Hughes
on the phone. He asked my opinion of the campaign and
when I gave him a few of my thoughts, Don asked me to
expand these thoughts and put them into a letter to you.
Please understand, Bob, I make no attempt to sit here on
the fringe and Monday morning quarterback.
However, since I do have some feelings on the recent
political months, I will set them down as briefly and
lucidly as I can.
In general I felt it was wrong to mount a Massive Attack
against the Democrats on the issue of Law and Order. There
is, as you know, a Point of No Return built into any attack,
and unfortunately I believe the Administration's attack
peaked far enough ahead of election day so that it was
rendered useless as a vote motivator.
In the final desperate hours I believe the Administration
lost a considerable number of votes by the total polarization
of the Republicansversus Bad Guys. Blanket endorsements
like blanket accusations are usually fallible, particularly
in an election year when the voters have been pre-saturated
with political prose. This was particularly true this year
when Ticket Splitting was forwarned. A perfect example was
represented here in California when a Conservative was
elected Governor, a Liberal Democrat was elected Senator
and a Negro Liberal was elected Superintendent of Schools.
Perhaps it is because I live here and "felt" the political
climate in the State that these three elections came as
no surprise to me.
-2-
Feeling all along that they were inevitable, I found the
"all Republicans are good guys and all Democrats are
bad guys" theology misdirected.
Another example of the same situation occurred in New York
where certainly Rockefeller was no surprise nor was Buckley.
I felt that the Democrats came into the campaign as a
debt-ridden, unorganized, scattered and shattered party.
However, due to some of the reasons I have cited above and
others, the Democratic Party emerged from the elections as
a unified party obviously now with the taste of victory and
in a much easier position to raise financing for the
Presidential race in 1972 which no longer looms as a
Republican certainty.
In short, the Administration solidified the Democrats by
making them "the Enemy".
If either party viewed 1970 as a Dress Rehearsal for 1972,
I believe Momentum is on the side of Mr. O'Brien.
I have always been a believer in Humanity and preferred it
over Hullabaloo. The difference between the two was greatly
evidenced on the eve of the election when we went for the
Hullabaloo by running on all three Networks a poor quality,
black and white, and very bad audio re-play of an occasion
that had already been reported to the Press.
The Democrats, on the other hand, chose to become the
Voice of Reason by framing Mr. Muskie in calmness and logic
with a low key approach much appreciated by voters who had
simply had it by now of slogans und cliches. Certainly many
of the key races decided the next day served to prove that
our man did not get through as a man.
I believe the voters are a little more sophisticated than
they are sometimes given credit for. I do not believe you
can say to them "bring us together" out of one side of your
mouth; tell them to "watch what we do and not what we say"
out the other side of your mouth; and accuse all Democrate
of being Anarchists out of the middle of your mouth.
To reinforce the above I have spent all of my life helping
a few individual men reach the greatest number of people.
In each case - the case of Jack Paar, the case of Dean Martan,
the case of Rowan and Martin and more recently John Wayne
-
I have always found Humanity works better than Hullabaloc.
-3-
PWK.
I have never preforred the Gut Fighter inage, and = feel
the people basically resent a partisan campaigning
President, particularly when he Blankets the Republicans
as the good guys and the Democrats as the bad guys.
I long feared that we would overplay our hand nationally
and it was in that regard that I violently opposed the
national televising of the Anaheim Rally and was, for a
brief period of time, responsible for the cancellation
of that network coverage.
I am sure that the last ditch, all-stops-pulled Crusade on
behalf of George Murphy was ill advised. No matter how
personal the friendship, no matter how high the political
osteem, the year was never a year in which George Murphy
could have been elocted onco the campaign started.
John Tunney was - from the very beginning - an idea whose
time had come in California. 1 more careful reading out
here would have shown that earlier.
Believe me, Bob, this is not Monday morning quarterbacking.
Whatever intelligence to the contrary that went back to
Washington from California was wrong. The danger, of course,
is that too often during the heat of political battles
the reports that are sent back are colored by the Hopes
of those doing the reporting.
As for the San Jose incident which we used far too
opportunistically. I find Reagan's quote on the news that
same night unforgivable. I refer specifically to Reagan's
on-the-air quote that "we kept giving them the Peace
sign and that makes them madder than anything".
In other words, Reagan was boasting on the news that while
inside the President's threatened car, he was heaping fuel
on an already inflamatory situation by taunting those
outside the car.
We know we have a better candidate than the Democrats
can produce in 1972.
We have two years during which the President, in the
conduct of his office, can prove to the people that he
is the better man.
Whatever he does, he must not be tagged with using the
Oval Room as Campaign Headquarters for 1972.
While I am deeply aware how the loss of so many Governors
hurts the party machinery, I am not concerned with the
technical aspects. I am mainly concerned with the public
image of the President as President and campaigner.
I hope I have been clear in these few thoughts in pointing
out some of the things that seemed wrong in 1970. Certainly
I don't glory in pointing out past wrongs. My only,
intention is to put the spot light on a few of them hoping
similar situations will be avoided in the future.
You know me well enough, Bob, to know that I would never
have volunteered the above unless I had been specifically
asked to do SO. And would never have burdened you with
such a long letter unless I have been specifically asked
to do SO.
Warmest regards,
Back
The Honorable Robert Finch
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C.