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 Buchanan to the President. RE: The President's Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/17/1972
From Tex Lezar to Ray Price. RE: Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/7/1972
From Ken Khachigian to Raymond Price, Jr. RE: Thoughts for Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/15/1972
From Bill Safire to the President. RE: Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/19/1972
From Ken Khachigian to Ray Price. RE: Acceptance Speech. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/20/1972
From Lee Huebner to Ray Price. RE: Acceptance Speech. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/18/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146863
label
WHSF: Contested, 51-13
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146863
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 51-13
description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to the President. RE: The President's Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/17/1972
From Tex Lezar to Ray Price. RE: Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/7/1972
From Ken Khachigian to Raymond Price, Jr. RE: Thoughts for Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/15/1972
From Bill Safire to the President. RE: Acceptance Speech. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/19/1972
From Ken Khachigian to Ray Price. RE: Acceptance Speech. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/20/1972
From Lee Huebner to Ray Price. RE: Acceptance Speech. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 7/18/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146863
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c0c6203cb7d725a5
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
51
13
8/17/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to the President. RE: The
President's Acceptance Speech. 2pgs.
51
13
7/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Tex Lezar to Ray Price. RE:
Acceptance Speech. 2pgs.
51
13
8/15/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Ken Khachigian to Raymond Price, Jr.
RE: Thoughts for Acceptance Speech. 2pgs.
51
13
7/19/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Bill Safire to the President. RE:
Acceptance Speech. 2pgs.
51
13
7/20/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Ken Khachigian to Ray Price. RE:
Acceptance Speech. 1pg.
51
13
7/18/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Lee Huebner to Ray Price. RE:
Acceptance Speech. 1pg.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Page 1 of 1
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
NUMBER
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
DATE
RESTRICTION
TYPE
N-1
memo
Bucharan to President, re:
The President's acceptance
8/17/72
[DOC 165]
speech
N12
memo
Tex Lezan to Price, re: acceptance
7/7/72
[DOC 166]
speech
N-3
memo
Khachigian to Rice, re: Thoughts
8/15/72
( Anit )
[DOC 167]
foracciptance speech
N-4
menes
safire to President, re: Occeptance
7/19/72
(caif)
DOC 168]
speech
N-5
memo
thachigian to Price, re: acceptance
7/20/72
[DOC 169]
speech
Cattached to cover report from
Khashyian, "accoptance
speech -
7/20/72]
N-G
memo
Hubner to Price, re:
[DOC 170]
( (mix)
speech
N-7
Memo
[Lour Havis] to-President],
hd.
[DOC 171]
This election is strangarm"
[attached to cover memo,
Colson to President, 8/3/72]
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
PPF
77
FOLDER TITLE
Wednesday, august 23,1972 Acceptance speech, II
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:
77
Folder:
Wednesday, August 23, 1972, Acceptance Speech, II
Document
Disposition
165
Return
Private/Political
166
Return
Private/Political
167
Return
Private/Political
168
Return
Private/Political
169
Return
Private/Political
170
Return
Private/Political
171
Return
Private/Political
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 17, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
(Per L. Higby)
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
The President's acceptance speech should be directed to the whole
nation of course, but politically to the voters between RN's rock
bottom 40 percent, and his top of 65 percent. That 25 percent of the
electorate is our target. It is: not Republican at all; Independent
and Democratic, conservative socially, moderate politically; middle
income, working income economically; Northern Catholic and ethnic
largely but Southern Protestant also; in addition, there are several
million young people who are largely apolitical, one would guess --
they are probably not the brightest or best students; they are more
likely from Ohio State, SMU, Notre Dame, NYU, tha n from Harvard
and Yale.
This is the segment of the population which is the "swing vote" this
fall, where the opportunity is great, where our appeal can and should
be made -- without alienation of the 40 percent base, which is
essentially Conservative and Republican.
STRUCTURE
The speech in my view, should be essentially of three parts:
1.
What the President has accomplished. Foreign policy, Vietnam
should dominate here, but the Supreme Court, the efforts against
crime and pollution, the new approach to the cities, etc., can all be
included.
The purpose of this section simply would be to remind the voters of
tremendous accomplishments of RN, and to set the stage, for the last
crucial part of the speech -- which deals with RN's Vision of where we
should be going. Would argue that RN detail briefly and toughly what
was the situation inthe nation when we took over the helm in 1968 --
what was it at home; what was it abroad and how all that has changed
dramatically.
-2-
2.
The middle part of the speech should strongly contrast the
President's positions and views with those of McGovern -- on Defense,
Amnesty, Permissiveness, Welfare, Foreign Policy, Isolationism,
Taxes, and Spending. We should draw McGovern's position without
naming here in stark terms on one side and RN's views on anothe r.
This should be interspersed with the strong political material, making
clear they are dreadfully wrong in their approach and options, and we
should be fairly tough here.
3.
The third section is the Vision, RN's view of where we are going
if you choose to join us. My view is that this section goes into two
parts -- the evils we will continue to halt, and combat, in the society
but more important the concrete dream of what we and our gathering here
intend to do. We are to be the instrument of a new elite or a new order
in American society, where the sons and daughters of workingmen and
middle class are going to assume the helm of the nation, at every level
from that elite which has dominated so long.
We should portray the President and his people as the instrument who
are pushing open the door - - not to affluence for these people -- they are
fairly well off, but to leadership, to bringing in to Government the
successor generation to the New Deal types who did their thing, but who
now must give way as the Hoover business types did We should be
concrete here.
And what are the accomplishments of this new generation of leaders to be:
The ending of the agony in Vietnam, the building of a new enduring structure
of international relations that can preserve for our children the peace
this generation of war veterans has never known. The remaking of
American society so that not just the sons of Harvard and Yale, but of
SMU, Notre Dame, of NYU and Whittier move into the decision-making
positions in American life. They chart the destiny of the nation,
henceforth. The President is the John the Baptist of a new leadership
emerging in all aspects of national life. The Old Establishment must
give way to these new blood, new men, with new ideas and old values.
At home, their jobs are to preserve and protect the environment that
has been destroyed, to provide new guarantees for the rights of the
victims in society. In any event, this will be spelled out in much more
detail in subsequent memoranda and paragraphs. These will be
coming up today and tomorrow.
Buchanan
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
RAY PRICE
FROM:
TEX LEZAR
SUBJECT:
Acceptance Speech
Just a few quick thoughts I've been mulling over about a possible RN
acceptance speech. What I propose is a definite long shot but one with,
I believe, quite a few merits.
First, a few guiding principles. It is essential for RN to attract as
many Dems and Independents as possible -- not only because for the
GOP to win he must, but also because he has a real chance to work a
realignment in American politics. To do this, RN should play up the
distinctions between him and McG focusing on the way in which the left
has taken over the Democratic Party - which no longer accepts its
progressive yet constructive beliefs of former times.
RN could begin with the normal acceptance speech routine but then
trail over into an analysis of what the country confronted in 1968. Hit
the left very hard as the prime mover behind the difficulties of the 60s.
As the WSJ notes in quoting Robert Nisbet today: "I think it would be
difficult to find a single decade in the history of Western culture when
as much barbarism, as much calculated onslaught against culture and
convention in any form, as much sheer degradation of both culture
and the individual passed into print, into music, into art, and onto
the American stage as the decade of the 1960's
" Remember the
fears of 1968!
Then go into what RN has tried to do to calm the country and get it
moving again. Some good cheer lines, a good general sweep strong
but with inner calm.
Then the punch line. As we have worked to improve the situation in
America, the Left has not sat idly by. They have taken over the
Democratic Party at the same time working in a narrowly partisan
way in the Congress to delay or prevent passage of many reforms
Preservation Copy
-2-
proposed by RN. As sorry as RN is to see the grand old Democratic
Party taken over by the Left he is in a sense happy that the test is at
last coming, the test between Progress based upon the unique and un-
precedented qualities for which America has stood over nearly two
centuries. It is fitting that now, poised near the beginning of America's
third century, our people should confront the issue head on: "Will we
turn our back upon the values and system which has done SO well, which
has been the marvel of the world, to move down the path often tried
abroad but always found wanting, or shall we improve upon the system
we now have building up instead of tearing down. 11 House divided
speech.
Direct into George McGovern. McGovern is a good man, but one whose
ideas would mean deep trouble for America. McG has been waffling
to the center, but the thrust of his ideas are unmistakable, and fool-
hardy. Then hit the thrust of those ideas comparing them to RN's
achievements and the historic character of America. Concentrate on
how the programs will hurt real life people like FDR, not ideology,
people.
This could be a reasonable, sincere, and analytic speech with a rousing
conclusion appealing to the character of the America people holding
out the uphill path which increases everyone's opportunity to become
better rather than the downhill path for America to some sociological
mean determined by an elite, superbureaucracy in Washington. This
could be RN's one really big campaign speech. The setting is perfect.
He can appear Presidential by appealing even beyond the Republican
Party and Convention to the Nation, yet can be political in this one
setting without damaging his sense of being above politics (Even a
President can be political in accepting his Party's nomination for the
Presidency).
He can even end with a note that he will not be campaigning extensively
in the Fall not because he doesn't realize the importance of this election,
not because he doesn't like to campaign, but because there is much
important work to be done internationally and domestically. RN's
record of performance is clear, but it is important for members of
his own Party and other concerned Americans to be clear about the
very different roads for America that this election will determine.
twen
can't - was me turn 1 marks back- a mor A
get stop govy in hards
then
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 15, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
RAYMOND K. PRICE, JR.
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN the
SUBJECT:
THOUGHTS FOR ACCEPTANCE SPEECH
Basically, here are my thoughts as to the direction of the
Acceptance speech after McGovern's last two national performances.
Frankly, I would like to see McGovern on the air giving those types
of speeches from now till November.
I can't put my finger on it, but it is the whining, whimpering,
petulance that seems to me to make the guy sound like, as someone
said, a common scold. There is no lift to his speeches, no basic
optimism, no relief from the onslaught of national decay.
TIME magazine had an interesting introductory piece this week
saying that there was, this summer, "a new summer sweetness, an
ease, or apathy, and in some parts of the country a distinct savor of
contentment. 11 TIME also said, however, that there were still signs
of an "undercurrent of malaise."
TIME is probably right on both counts. As far as the contentment
goes, I think RN is right on the money the sense of contentment is
going to rub off by osmosis to RN's benefit.
The malaise, or alienation, or whatever you want to call it is
quite another thing. This is the string McGovern is playing, and he will
press it by touching the deepest chords of resentment he can find.
The antidote to this is, as I see it, quite fundamental. It requires
an upbeat, optimistic (though not pollyannish), "bully pulpit" approach
which will confront the dark thoughts and the sense of foreboding that
McGovern is seeking out.
People can be convinced that this disquieting mood is not cause for
political upheaval, but rather just the opposite: it is cause to keep the
sturdy hand at the rudder, the deft statesmanship, and, yes, the pro-
fessional President.
Page 2
Discontent can be channeled toward the up-tightness of
McGovern or it can be channeled toward the steadiness of RN.
That is our choice to some extent, and the President can make
this fairly clear in the Acceptance speech.
The question is do we dwell on our sins, or do we accept
our sins and dwell on our virtues (or, as someone said, on the
"better angels of our nature").
Frankly, the President needs to stir a lot of people out of the
lethargy which causes them to feel sorry for themselves and
for the country. That might be the case if we let it slide without
confrontation. The national character is just as debatable an issue
as the economy or Vietnam. RN has the advantage on this one, and
he should use every ounce of moral suasion at his command to mark
a retreat from the steady drumbeat of negativism which pervades
McGovernism -- the sickly admission that we don't have self-confidence
and that we have lost our direction.
As far as I am concerned, this should be the central theme coming
out of Miami Beach. Few people can do it as well as RN -- and believe
me, there are millions of Americans waiting for their national leader
to convince them that they aren't as bad off as everyone seems to say
they are.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 19, 1972.
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT (Via Ray Price)
FROM:
BILL SAFIRE
SUBJECT:
Acceptance Speech
I think we can dispense with the usual stuff about the speech having
to be "Presidential" and not strident or overly partisan of
course that is true, but how can it be Presidential and still be
emotionally stirring? How can it express vividly a dimension of
the President that people in the middle feel only vaguely?
The target audience, in my view, is more the people at home than
the people in the hall, and more the people in the center than the
people on the right. A few expected shots can go in ("As long as I
am President, the United States will always be ready to sit down
and talk, but this Nation shall never willing to kneel dewn and
beg") and something along that line will tear the convention hall
apart, but we must take care not to play to the hall primarily we
must resist the temptation to slam hard. The speech should be re-
membered as being reassuring and mature. in stark contrast to the
implied radicalism and immaturity of the opposition.
Keep
How to go about this ? I would center the speech on the theme of
peace: First, how necessary is strength of character and strength
of arms in negotiating a peace that will last; second, how far we
have come in bringing peace to the world already, recalling not
only the summits but Berlin and the Middle East; and finally, per-
haps most important politically, the domestic meaning of peace
how peace will affect our pocketbooks at home, our fears for our
children, our daily lives. As of now, peace is only a negative
Preservation
blessing no war but it will also bring positive benefits of a
prosperity without inflation, of greater investments in well-being
of the elderly and sick, more money available for education and for
with affirmation and necessary change.
tax reduction, of a society that replaces absenu disorder and displeasure
next grent sty - the blessings born pean
we have Topypel rive is aim we have brought Deaft
new reduce Breader 1 ann Resulting days date
more cut capet been
-2-
dean dear with
Deepening this theme, you should explain to a mature people that
peace, like anything worthwhile, cannot be purchased on the cheap.
The philosophy of something for nothing, which has had a revival
these days, is still a dangerous illusion, weakening our character,
sapping our strength. Nothing comes for nothing not even the
air we breathe or the water we drink which have to be preserved
by some sacrifice on our part. Praise the work ethic and point to
the need to work hard for peace. We have to be strongly for peace.
What are the sacrifices to be made for a peaceful world? What are
the new challenges of peace, more subtle and requiring more wisdom
than the challenges of war?
Here is the place for a powerful denunciation of isolationism, on
practical grounds (leads to war), on moral grounds (no man is an
island John Donne), and on idealistic grounds (America's message
of freedom to people everywhere).
I would summarize near the end by listing the benefits to be brought
by "the practical people of peace" (in unspoken contrast to the im-
practical dreamers who have always failed); with a reminder of how
far we have come and how the goal is now within our reach if only
we do not falter.
I would not hesitate to close on Tanya, which will not be well received
by the press, but which has never been given to a wide American
audience. Perhaps it can be capped with a reminiscence of a little
American girl touched by the tragedy of war, cause for a rededication
to peace.
The greatest dangers to an acceptance speech are: (1) cataloggery,
when the incumbent feels the urge to mention every achievement he
is responsible for, and to dwell on all the things that were wrong
when he took over Audience reaction to that approach is "Thanks,
and
Winston, and now to a Labour government for the future. 11 (2)
Slashing attack on the opposition, elevating their importance and
showing they are worthy of worry by you. (3) Speaking to a large
rather than an intimate audience. The people who count are watching
in twos and threes; the convention is purely a forum, to be used for
reaction-contagion.
I will submit draft language from time to time, as will others, but I
do not think you should focus on writing it until a week or SO before
delivery. There is much to be said for freshness.
Programmer
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 20, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
RAY PRICE
FROM:
KENKHACHIGIAN
SUBJECT:
ACCEPTANCE SPEECH
I have a strong feeling that the Acceptance Speech must
reflect the President's own personal dissatisfaction with many
things as they are. It will be difficult to do, but it must be
written not only to boast of four years of accomplishment but
also to indicate that there is some sense of dissatisfaction at
that which remains to be done.
The President should try to defend the Establishment (us)
without sounding establishmentarian. I believe one of McGovern's
strongest campaign assets is his ability to strike out at the
establishment, and if we are doing it better than he is, then we
give him a moving target instead of a sitting duck.
Also the speech should touch on McGovern's weak points
with obvious reference. His welfare giveaway, his weak defense
posture, his soak-the-middle-class proposals, and others must
be hit at least by reference. I have attached some things which
will do that.
As I mentioned to you, it is crucial that a paragraph's reference
ought to be made to the farmer and agriculture, McGovern sort of
ignored this, and we shouldn't -- also attached.
Finally, I paid most attention to developing an "America is not
sick" theme, one which I believe would be a very effective rhetorical
theme for the campaign, but must be done skillfully enough so as
not to connote "stand-patism."
Attachments
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 18, 1972
TO:
RAY PRICE
FROM:
LEE HUEBNER
SUBJECT:
Acceptance Speech
It seems to me the acceptance speech should try to do three
things:
1) Characterize the Nixon approach as one of balance,
sophistication, maturity and responsibility. (I have been searching
for some pithy way to communicate these qualities.)
2) Imply that the McGovern approach is extreme, simplistic,
and irresponsible, without stooping to the petty name-calling as we
are often tempted to do.
3) Make dissident Democrats -- who don't feel quite "at home"
with the McGovern approach feel "at home with the Nixon approach,
>
despite their old suspicions.
I think all three of these goals could be advanced in a simple,
sharp, attention-getting way (one which would surely draw follow-up
comment) by specifically using what is probably Adlai Stevenson's
most famous single line, the one from his 1952 acceptance speech which
says: "Let's talk sense to the American people. 11
People are fed up with political rhetoric and waiting for candidates
to "talk sense. 11 Using the quotation would make the argument --
implicitly -- that McGovern has left the centrist traditions to which
his predecessor candidates adhered. And the incongruity of Nixon
quoting Stevenson is the very thing which could give it real impact, and
help to bring unhappy Democrats in.
Think about it. If the President doesn't do it, some other speaker
might.
Talk sence
?
Preservation Cops
This election is stranger than nearly any other in American history.
It is possible for President Nixon to win the popular vote and lose the
electoral vote assuming a minimum 60-40 Nixon victory in the South
and a McGovern lead of 54-46 in the East, 52-48 in the Mid-West and
54-46 in the West. Nixon can achieve 50.1 percent of the vote and lose
the election. This is a direct reversal of the prevalent situation in the
1930s in FDR's time.
McGovern can win in a five-prong campaign. He can use the theme
that it is a time of deep change in America, a time to end hypocrisy in
high places and a time to end the dominance of the rich and powerful in
this country -- especially the dominance of big business. (When we
recently asked which is more important, to crack down on big corporations
who might evade taxes and cause pollution or to crack down on student,
Vietnam and militant black protesters. by 58 to 39 percent the public
answered back, crack down on big corporations.)
The five prongs of the McGovern campaign could be:
1. Tax reform with higher taxes for upper income people and
corporations, coupled with lower taxes for lower income people
(favored by an overwhelming 90-6 percent. )
2. Cut defense spending, favored by 59 to 30.
u.s.
3. Legalize abortion, favored by 48-43. Significantly the following
groups favored legalized abortion up to 4 months of pregnancy:
$15, 000+, 62-33; college educated, 62-33; 18-29 year olds, 64-31;
Independents, 58-34; Jewish, 72-19; 30-49 year olds, 51-42; union
members, 47-43. However, catholics oppose abortion by 54-37 as do
Midwesterners by 48-42. The 54-37 catholic opposition is very close
to the current 54-36 lead of Nixon over McGovern on the vote.
on
McGovern can claim to be taking a politically courageous stand on
abortion and in the process firm up precisely the swing groups
your
which can make the difference. McGovern could go further to
show courage in taking an unpopular position by strongly advocating
amnesty for draft evaders who fled the country, opposed nationwide
by 58-33. However, such amnesty is favored by 18-29 voters 55-39;
by Jewish 62-27; and by the college educated 49-46. He could do
the same in an even more effective way by advocating and easing
the penalties for the use of marijuana, opposed nationally 54-40.
Preservation Coro
2.
However, such an easing of penalties is favored by $15, 000 and over
by 49-46 percent. Independent voters 51-43; 18-29 voters 61-36;
suburban voters 48-45; college educated 57-37; by Jewish 65-32%.
In other words, a grave danger is that by taking what seems to be
a stand designed to lose him votes, McGovern in fact can be firming
up precisely those swing votes which will put him within striking
distance of victory.
4. Draw out President Nixon and especially Vice President Agnew to
make savage frontal assaults on McGovern, on protesters, amnesty,
marijuana and permissiveness all of which would firm up the
high income, the educated, the suburban, the young and the indepen-
dent vote to go for McGovern. Then he could come in positively on
abortion and defense spending to achieve majority support to go
with these key group S.
5. He could make his bread and butter or pork chop appeal among the
union vote and Catholic voters on the tax reform issue
The five-prong strategy can be thwarted in these ways:
1. For Nixon to say that he has dared to try drastic changes abroad
in the foreign policy and it has begun to work. He is not afraid of
change at home as the price-wage freeze last August indicated.
And now he wants to have the chance to do at home what he has
done abroad.
2. Put an immediate freeze or crackdown right away on food processers,
prices and profits. The public does not blame farmers for high food
prices, they do blame food processers and the middle man. In
addition, advocate four or five tough tax reform measures that are
patently anti-business. This will thwart McGovern's prong of making
business the whipping post.
3. Point up how defense spending has come down as a percent of the
federal budget. Yet at the same time, point up that this has been done
without decimating the U.S. defense shield and guard.
4. Lay off taking McGovern on the amnesty and marijuana issues.
5. Advocate desegregation in education and in other parts of our
national life but also say that busing is the wrong way to do it because
busing not only will harden the opposition to desegregation but will
also delay other effective steps which can increase the likelihood of
success for racial progress.
Copy
3.
6. Openly advocate aid to parochial schools, but leave to others to
use the abortion issue.
7. For union members take the line that in no way will we apologize
for the price-wage freeze. Emphasize that the purpose of that
freeze and the controls programmed to follow was to protect the
pocketbook of the working man by cracking down on excessive
prices so that wages and salaries would have some buying power.
(Consistently over 80% would rather have price and wage restraint
than to take their chances on unrestrained wages and prices.)
How Nixon Can Win
There are two key sets of groups that can overturn this election:
One, the swing vote made up of independents, the college educated,
suburbanites, the young and the $15, 000+ income group.
This group can be worked on by emphasizing that the President has
changed the outlook in the world in four years from war to peace.
(Note the President's rating on working for peace has gone from
38 to 74% positive among these groups since a year ago July.)
A second approach to this same group is to raise the hope that as
much can be doneinthe next 4 years at home as has been done to pro-
guarder?
duee a beginning toward peace abroad. Fundamentally, this swing
group can be affected by an appeal that the quality of life can be
improved at home through environmental control, consumer protection,
racial and educational progress and welfare reform. Note: almost
all of the front and center rhetoric of the campaign should be directed
toward these groups.
Two, traditional Democrats make up the second key group. These are
to be found in the South which can be handled essentially quietly simply
by having the Vice President campaign continuously but in a low key.
He is enough of a symbol there to do the job. The second strand of
traditional Democrats are the union members. Here the President must
make a pledge to cut unemployment, but also not depart from the basic
theme that it is better to get prices down to protect the worth of wages
than to allow every man for himself on price and wage increases. A
third Democratic group are Catholics who can be directly but quietly
appealed to on the aid to parochial schools issue, but again not in a front
and center way.
Safe 1. institute
Issuer
(Independent
-
gut ains for
Caltralin
annuerty
2. Foreign Envoirement, refairs, welfor A
Tages
(
abortain
Pot-
Defense
3, Tax cut - Sound Economic
Read outural
Basic Nixon Theme
The President should advocate over and over pm again that he stands four-
square for change but change that works. The theme of change that
works can be powerful for it opts the change mood of the country and at
the same time points up the difference between the practical, pragmatic
approach President Nixon makes as opposed to the pie-in-the-sky McGovern's
easy promises.
Specifically the President should say that he has promised to work for
peace and that he has moved toward a formidable means to achieve peace,
but this has not been done through easy promises, but rather by dint of
hard, tough negotiation. What is more, this is only the beginning; there
is much more ahead. For example, there is a long road to go still on
arms control. And we have only begun to take the long positive road to
economic growth and the use of American resources in the world through
expanded trade for peaceful approach and unbounded good for all of the
people of the earth. These beginnings for peace have not been produced
by America giving in nor by America begging, but rather through firm
negotiations always from strength. We have sought out common areas of
agreement with mutual benefit for both ourselves and the communists. But
above all else, underlying all of the moves for peace has been the element
of mutual respect.
Now, the beginnings made abroad are precisely what must be done in
the next four years here at home. First and foremost, the state of the
economy. The President got tough last August with the price-wage freeze
and is being tough again this August with the food processer crack-down.
We have made a start toward recovery of the economy; that is not yet
g ood enough. There could be unbounded hope for economic growth at
home in the next four years
The President should advocate tough tax reform, not of the pie-in-the-
sky variety, but change that works. There must be 4 or 5 concrete measures
advocating. Warning should be served on business that it will be rewarded
as an incentive to produce and grow and to expand, but there will be no
incentive for business to fail to share the wealth with all segments of the
American people.
The President should also pledge in the next four years to improve the
quality of life, that we should stop attacking each other and should start
attacking our common problems, These include air and water pollution,
Preservation
"
5.
adequate health care within the means of each family, expanded educa-
tional opportunity and progress toward achieving racial equality. A
pledge can be made to dedicate the resources which formerly were used
for war to improve the quality of life. These would be peace dividends
for the American people.
Others may promise the sun and the stars, I'll pledge only to move us
forward. Others may talk of sweeping change, I will pledge only to produce
change that works. Others may talk of radical income distribution, I will
pledge only an economy that works for better living standards for all and
keeps open the doors of opportunity for initiative, competence and unstinting
effort toward excellence to be rewarded. Others may talk of easy cuts in
defense spending, I will only pledge arms reduction that also keeps the
peace. Others may talk of telling America to go back home, but I say let us
go out America to help ourselves and all the world find peace and a better
life.
There is a basic morality at stake in this Presidential campaign. I
say the next President must make a moral compact with the American
people to achieve peace in the world and a chance to fight for a better
quality of life at home. There is a call of greatness in that moral compact.
It is not born of ringing words, but of hard won achievements step by step,
piece by piece. But, greatness can never be yours to describe the easy
promise, only the hard won results. The only change that counts is the
change that works.
This election is basic and historic because the American people have
a clear choice: between promise of forward progress that works or those
who would come in with social and political experimentation, founded on
protest, but in fact a retreat from America's role in the world and founded
on catering to the fashionable fads of the moment at home. I pledge change,
but change rooted in reality, not fantasy, change that changes people's lives
for good, not change that ends up pitting one group against another.
I ask a simple compact: give me your trust, your help and a limitless
world of hope lies ahead. Mistakes have been made and others will be made
in the future. Change that works is not achieved without its failures, but
I will not hesitate to try change that works, but always on a sound base. I
know what it is to hew out progress for peace. I know it is not easy. I ask
for a mandate of change that works. Give me your message. Give me your
trust for another moral compact for four more years.
6.
Caveats:
1.
Do not go after McGovern directly or personally.
2.
Defuse the tax reform and defense issues.
3.
Do not make blatant appeals on what has been done or can be done
for various groups.
4. Above all, do not defend the status quo.
5.
Do not engage in savage attacks that can be accused of going for the
jugular.
6.
Always indicate an urgent sense that there is so much yet to do and so
little timé to do it.
7.
Richard Nixon can win with the cleanest campaign in history.