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 Colson to Nixon RE: "Your Meeting with Secretary Connally This Afternoon" 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/11/1972

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
26147029
label
WHSF: Contested, 53-3
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26147029
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 53-3
description
This file contains: From Colson to Nixon RE: "Your Meeting with Secretary Connally This Afternoon" 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/11/1972
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26147029
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
b8876f0326be9b5e
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library Contested Materials Collection Folder List Box Number Folder Number Document Date No Date Subject Document Type Document Description 53 3 4/11/1972 Campaign Memo From Colson to Nixon RE: "Your Meeting with Secretary Connally This Afternoon" 2pg Wednesday, June 13, 2012 Page 1 of 1 DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT] DOCUMENT DOCUMENT NUMBER TYPE SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS DATE RESTRICTION N-1 Memo Colson to the President fe! "Your 4/11/72 ((Nixon) [67] Meeting with Secretary Connally This Afternoon" FILE GROUP TITLE BOX NUMBER STAFF SECRETARY 83 FOLDER TITLE PRESIDENTIAL MEMOS 1972 CONNALLY 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 D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.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 H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.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: Staff Secretary Box Number: 83 Folder: Presidential Memos - 1972 Connally Document Disposition 67 Return Private/Political THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON April 11, 1972 THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN MEMORANDUM FOR: THE PRESIDENT FROM: CHARLES COLSON SUBJECT: Your Meeting with Secretary Connally This Afternoon In connection with your meeting this afternoon with Secretary Connally, you might find of interest some very significant data which Sindlinger passed on to me last night. In two polls prior to Connally's meeting with the retailers, (March 16-March 22; March 23-March 30), we declined precipitously in political standing. In response to the question, "If next year's Presi- dential election were being held today, would you vote for the reelection of President Nixon?", we dropped to 39. 8% yes and 29. 2% no in the first poll and in the second we continued to decline to 37. 7% yes and 30. 8% no, our poorest showing since early August of 1971. Following Connally's meeting with the retailers, for which there was a high public awareness, there was a dramatic turn around. In the poll of March 31- April 4, the yes replies rose to 44. 6% and the no replies declined to 25.2%. In a poll completed this past Sunday, the yes replies rose to 49.6% and the no replies declined to 21.6%. Throughout this period, when respondents were asked for the number one reason that they would not vote for the President's reelection, approximately half cited, "not stopping inflation", four times as large as the next most frequent response and many times larger than the typical replies Sindlinger gets, "I am a Democrat", "not doing a good job", etc. 2. Sindlinger's polls always show a greater sensitivity to economic issues than anything else because generally the interviewe r con- centrates on economic questions before asking political questions. Hence the respondent is generally conditioned to thinking about the economy before expressing a political view. On the other hand, Sindlinger has an enormous statistical base and even if his informa- tion is distorted, the trend line would have to be regarded as a fairly significant barometer. Sindlinger points out that this was the most volatile swing in public opinion since the two months preceding your August 15 statement last year. It is very unusual in his poll to show such sharp movement in the political questions. The fact that we have bounced back to a very strong position today, actually as high as we have ever been, indicates that the damage was temporary but it also indicates how explosive the food price issue is. Sindlinger attributes the bounce-back to the Connally meeting with retailers and the fact that food prices have indeed tapered off in recent weeks. To summarize Sindlinger's advice and data: (1) we have to be very sensitive to this issue and alert to price rises, food in particular, (2) public attitudes are very volatile today especially on a pocketbook issue like this, and (3) political support for anyone in today's environment is fragile. Over the coming months we have to watch carefully for any moveme of this kind so that we can step in early, take hard, forceful action and prevent a re-occurance of this kind of political erosion. In this instance, we almost waited too long. It is a little unnerving to think of the consequences had this particular cycle occurred next October. Also, we are not yet out of the woods on this issue. Male yes responses continue to run significantly higher than female; there is still a spread, although not as big as it was a month ago. The spread between male and female support suggests that the food price issue is still alive. In short, we have to keep jawboning and/or take whatever other steps are necessary to at least demonstrate to the public that we are not going to let food prices rise.