← 206-014206-016 →

Conversation 206-015

TapeTape 206StartSunday, August 20, 1972 at 4:00 PMEndSunday, August 20, 1972 at 5:59 PMParticipantsNixon, Richard M. (President);  Haldeman, H. R. ("Bob")Recording deviceCamp David Hard Wire
AI Summary

President Nixon and H. R. Haldeman met at Camp David to deliberate on the content, tone, and emotional impact of Nixon's upcoming 1972 acceptance speech. The discussion focused on refining the closing remarks, specifically debating the effectiveness of incorporating the story of Tanya Savicheva—a symbol of wartime suffering—to evoke a sense of global peace and national unity. The pair sought a narrative that contrasted Nixon’s vision for American leadership with that of his opponent, George McGovern, ultimately aiming for a message that would inspire the public while avoiding the perceived emotional voids in drafts provided by Raymond Price and others.

1972 presidential campaignAcceptance speechTanya SavichevaGeorge McGovernForeign policyPolitical communication
AudioNARA Description

On August 20, 1972, President Richard M. Nixon and H. R. ("Bob") Haldeman met in the Aspen Lodge study at Camp David at an unknown time between 4:00 pm and 5:59 pm. The Camp David Hard Wire taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 206-015 of the White House Tapes.

Nixon Library Finding Aid
Conversation No. 206-15

Date: August 20, 1972
Time: Unknown between 4:00 pm and 5:59 pm
Location: Camp David Hard Wire

The President met with H. R. (“Bob”) Haldeman.

*****************************************************************

BEGIN WITHDRAWN ITEM NO. 1
[Personal returnable]
[Duration:    36s     ]

END WITHDRAWN ITEM NO. 1

*****************************************************************

                                   (rev.Oct-06)

The President’s forthcoming acceptance speech
     -Biblical quotations
           -The President’s 1960 campaign
           -George S. McGovern speeches
                -Henry A. Kissinger
           -Possible radio speeches
                -Kissinger
     -Closing
           -Haldeman’s view
                -Raymond K. Price, Jr.
                -Tanya Savicheva story
           -Kissinger's view
                -Tanya story
           -Tanya story
                -Price
                -John K. Andrews, Jr.
                -McGovern
           -Challenge to America
                -Contrast with McGovern
           -Need for emotion
                -Tanya story
                -Price
           -World peace aspirations
                -McGovern
                -Soviet Union
                -Peace dividend
                     -Cities
                     -Environment
                             -John D. Ehrlichman
                     -Congress
                             -Welfare reform
                             -Revenue sharing
                     -The President’s reading of draft
                             -The President’s previous televised address to the Soviet
                                    people
                                   -US desire for peace
                                   -Tanya story
           -Tone
                -Kissinger’s view
                -Haldeman’s view
           -Price
           -Haldeman’s view
                -Need for specifics

                                        (rev.Oct-06)

                          -Price’s material
                          -Tanya story
                -Acceptance of challenge
                      -Need for unity
           -Tanya story
                -Haldeman’s view
                      -Audience Studies Incorporated [ASI] market reseatch
                          -Response to movie
                                 -Measurement
                                 -Results

Haldeman and the President left at 5:59 pm.
Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Take a look.
back to your other work and the
I got it.
It doesn't say anything about children.
I don't think so.
I think it's right in the way that McGovern could say it.
McGovern wouldn't say it.
I guess.
Because it's central.
I don't know.
Which one have you read?
The One Child.
Oh, that one.
That one.
To me at least, it just doesn't say anything.
I mean, no, I don't mean, I don't mean to blame him, but he knows the speeches about foreign policy and domestic policy.
I don't, but anyway, I think you're better off closing on the Tanya thing and just closing.
Well, Henry wouldn't like that.
No, he doesn't like the, I didn't mention Tanya to him because I don't want to, and he's been reacting unfairly because he wants, he wants a strong close.
You know what I mean?
I told Ray and John, they called him the best thing
about Tanya as one possible thing or something.
You know, you've been looking at other alternatives, like, didn't rule Tanya out.
Oh, sure, they have to rule her out.
Or something that would either pay off the Tanya thing or replace it.
Every argument against Ray's child thing probably runs for the Tanya thing.
The government couldn't say the Tanya thing.
No, because it wasn't there.
but a different kind of thing.
Yeah.
Do you want a ringing challenge for an artist to be strong?
Well, basically, yes.
I'm working on that, too.
I mean, the idea that this is a time when, I mean, of course, you've got to turn away from greatness, not to turn inward.
accept the exciting challenges of leadership in the world.
This is what I have written.
Not by dividing Americans, but by uniting them with confidence in the future.
Not playing on our fears,
A governor can't say that.
That would meet Henry's... that criterion.
Where does that lead to?
Oh.
There will be no emotion in the speech without the timing.
We just don't have anybody that can write this kind of stuff.
That's all.
And there's no emotion in this.
That's the point I was going to say.
You're totally right.
uplift and with emotional impact.
And they're working together, not just for victory in this election, but this election would be the only meaning for people's health, and there's nothing in that.
You know, this is not a bad line that I had on one of my earlier conclusions.
The chance America now has to lead the way to building the last
That's all it is.
Yeah.
And there again, the government can't do that.
I'll run the damn thing off.
the way i have this now it's pretty on the beast thing i try to get i i talked about all the about the peace you know about rebuilding our cities i mean if we can get peace and move forward on our promising initiatives to restore our natural environment
got it all in there.
Then I go on to say, and here's the real critical thing, the beast dividend is too often described solely in monetary terms.
How much money we could take out of the arms budget to supply to our domestic needs.
By far the biggest dividend, however, is achieving our goal and achieving our goal.
Achieving our goal.
By far the biggest dividend, however, is that achieving our goal but truly
Whatever mistakes our nation has made in the field of foreign policy have been mistakes of the head, not the heart.
Speaking on behalf of all the American people, I was proud to be able to say in my television address to the Russian people in Maine, we covet no one else's heritage.
We seek no dominion over any other people.
We seek the right to live in peace not only for ourselves but for all the nations in the world.
When we talk about peace, let us never forget
That says a lot about peace, which, you know,
Chance America now has to leave the way that those last pieces of the world may never come again.
We must seize them all, and meet the challenge before it slips away.
My trip to the Soviet Union, and my visit to the cemetery, was worth $300,000.
I saw the picture.
The only time it was sold.
As we worked toward a more peaceful world, the list that took time ended the other times.
Their brothers and sisters, everyone.
China, Russia.
I think that is better than what you read just before.
Do you use that?
Does one lead to the other?
I think what we said just before.
In other words, to the other, there's what you didn't like about the one before, which probably would have added a price to that.
There's some of it that's kind of, it doesn't really, it sounds like it's just talking for the sake of talking.
It doesn't.
We're talking about one of the most important elements in each person's life, both for a better life and suffering as children.
I'm just talking about spending less on iron.
We're talking about an end to the haunting fear that has hung over every generation.
That's pretty good.
You like that?
Yeah, for some reason.
But I don't understand that stuff about in each person.
No.
I don't think so.
No, because it's specific.
Price of stuff is generality.
It's a concrete philosophy where time is a real, discernible thing.
We're going to have peace.
America has the challenge.
In other words, the idea of the time and we must let it slip away.
And this is not a time to turn away from greatness.
This is not a time to complain.
I'm going to use the word whine about our frustrations.
Don't you like that?
I do.
I like that.
Without saying, I don't want to say come home.
Would you like that?
Yep.
Not by dividing America, by uniting America.
I think you can do that after you're done.
Yes, Tanya.
I will use the whiteboard.
Sure.
I guess we're the only ones.
I don't think so.
They have a film...
Forget about the thing.
They have a testing device, which we use in advertising all the time, to test the reaction to films and commercials and stuff.
And the people that are watching in the theater have buttons that they push that indicate their reaction.
They keep pushing them all the time as they're watching it so that you can measure every...
They don't say anything.
They move the dial to the place where it indicates their response.
It's a
How do you tell a person how to respond?
Thank you.
← 206-014206-016 →