Nixon, Haldeman & Moynihan on 1972 Presidential Campaign

Transcript (AI-generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI (WhisperX) and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Names and numbers are often wrong; speakers are not identified. Do not cite it as authoritative — verify against the audio and the finding aid.

Download transcript (.txt) ·JSON data · Click a timestamp to play from that point; the page address then links to that moment (e.g. #t=125).

I think we have searched Christ's time to find anybody to write speeches, and it's goddamn difficult, because on the speechwriting thing and the research, we have good, pragmatic people who write very bad with dull prose, but in terms of basically the rigid people facing their next time.

Well, all I mean, I don't mean it,

The interesting thing is that I, even though they were the last to admit it, probably the presidents who have been in this chair for, well, ever since Wilson, probably have a more open mind in terms of discussing things, and also, frankly, more experience, a more wide-ranging view

in foreign and domestic policy than anybody who's been around.

But the difficulty is getting them to come in is a pretty sad deal.

I mean, they're not necessarily... Can I just then say, I think this is text.

I really do.

Oh, you're welcome.

I read their books.

And that's not very good, some of them, but...

I think you would find that, I mean, you know, there's the center of American politics, this coalition we've talked about, it's in a shattered, it's disarranged.

I think you would find that there are more people who think that you have been trying to keep together whilst everyone else has been trying to pull it apart than you would imagine.

I think in the second four years, sir,

there was this large conceptual work to do, and that we could do it.

And I obviously, you know, it is the situation.

When you really come down to it, one of our boys made a very good announcement.

He said that the election this year is really going to be there, essentially.

The debate, say what we want.

The debate between Roosevelt and Wilton.

The debate between Roosevelt and Truman.

I mean, Roosevelt and Dewey.

The debate between Truman

The debate between Eisenhower and Stephen Stevens, the debate between Kennedy and Nixon, certainly not to that point.

And incidentally, you could even say the Goldwater interest was really not about animals, gold.

I mean, so they all believed in a strong America.

They all believed in a bipartisan foreign policy, despite all the acting about Goldwater.

He was a strong, you know, favorite protestant.

I have actually said it.

And they all believed in, basically, the American economic system.

They were for changes in the system, but they weren't for shattering it, you know what I mean?

They were just drawing on the rest.

They wanted to build on the good and throw away the bad.

I mean, we all know that.

Now, the debate this year is a hell of a lot bigger.

because it's between two men who disagree with the goals, what America's global world should be, what its defense should be, what kind of economic policy we should have.

Now, the real incident, I would disclose it this way, which I think you might make, and I would make, I think they're very fortunate, I would say they're responsible,

the moderates, we'll call them your kind of Democrats, basically the Stevensonians and so forth.

They're rather fortunate in one sense, if they do not want to go all the way with the more extreme elements of the government.

Some may, a lot will, because that's their reaction.

But you see, the answer to

That extreme position taken by one party, which we have here, could be the reaction of a very extreme position taken by the other party.

And maybe seeing that, we would probably win.

And then, in other words, this would be an opportunity for a very extreme view to prevail.

Now, we're not doing that.

Yeah, not really, we're not.

That doesn't mean we're taking an liberal view.

But basically, rather than take an extreme view, identifying that, we are proceeding on course, we're not being deflected from it.

In other words, we really offer a home at this point.

Not only we're Republicans, and it's not beyond

who have mentioned that I still have some dang hard criticism from the far right, you know, or the bourgeoisie kicking the shit out of the church.

It's awful.

And we hear about it in the words of Jesus.

I'm prosaic to that.

You know, I'm part of the Jewish experience.

The California liturgy of God is really bad.

Everybody out there is supposed to be everybody that's true.

But anyway, on the other hand, we have avoided this, and we'll continue to avoid it.

In other words, this could be one of those periods when one party going to one extreme, the other party would go to the other, the other extreme, and the result would not be .

But what we, what I see is an opportunity, an opportunity to offer for what I think is really the solid majority of Americans, solid majority of Americans a place to come where

their views and their philosophy is represented.

Where they can be for progress without being for destruction.

And it seems to me that that's why the election.

It seems to me that's why you're going to win.

If we win.

The other point that I should make is

We're asking that you support a lot of that in France.

And I also said, look, that, I said to a group who was in here the other day, and they came in and said this door is open.

And I said, I want you to know that it's open now because we've got election time, but it's gonna be open after the election, so, because we're not going to be looking at people in terms of an R after their name or a D after their name, or an I after their name.

to the end of the brains, and the character, and the philosophy, to be a government.

If they are, they're a government.

That's what we want.

Michael?

Listen, sir, it's been historic, and I think that you must feel, Judy must feel terrible about what she's done.

Well, we've done a few problems, you know.

Oh, you've got to feel...

I call it a bug in the water game.

Can I just ask you one question?

I know it's difficult to plan things.

Can you imagine what it would be like if it succeeded and you had half your people

That's right.

I hadn't thought about that.

The main thing about that is that it's not done.

It shouldn't have been tried at all.

But to be honest, Washington, if anybody thinks they're there to find anything, I'm the National Committee.

I would leave all the places in Washington.

I would be glad to laugh.

I wouldn't put locks in the door of the public.

They could walk in and take on anything we got, just like our little damn thing never received.

That really is, that's the supremity.

Thank you.

Fair to see you.

I'd just like to tell you, well, get to, uh, just have some fun.

Take off your pants.

I am, I am, I cry, you can't tell.

Frank says, I'm out, and the nurse says, early.

Thank you.

Nixon, Haldeman & Moynihan on 1972 Presidential Campaign

AI Summary

Audio

Transcript (AI-generated)

NARA Description

Nixon Library Finding Aid

Also recorded on August 14, 1972

Cite this conversation