APO AE 09213-1315
November 2, 1994
Republican National Committee
310 First Street, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20003
Dear Sirs:
I was Chairman of Republicans Abroad in China during the 1992 Presidential election. And was as disappointed as everyone else at the outcome, which I attribute (as with the first Nixon candidacy in 1960) to the obstinacy of the economy in remaining in recession. Except that in 1992, almost everyone now agrees that the economy had in fact been in a state of fairly strong recovery for six or eight months before we went to the polls. Problem was media wonks misleadingly insisted we were still in dreadful shape right up till we went to the polls. Almost immediately thereafter they started announcing what a great recovery Clinton had given us! and worrying whether the Fed might have over-tightened, risking another recession.
Caught the appearance of Professor Thomas Patterson on Mary Matalin's Equal Time the other night. Panel was agreed that the Dan Rathers of the media have so centrally insinuated themselves into the political process that voters are getting six minutes of their firm chins, knitted eyebrows, and opinionated views for every two minutes of candidate issues-oriented comment. And candidate views are then further massaged to either improve or worsen what they have said according to the commentators' views of what people ought to think. I'm personally of the opinion that the media wonks stole the last election (of course our friend Ross Perot did his bit -- as he's trying to do in the Mid-terms).
I wrote the enclosed paper immediately following the 1992 election. Haven't done anything with it. Just sent a copy to Professor Patterson thinking that if he agreed, he might try to promulgate the idea in future talk show appearances. I suspect that candidates for the 1996 Presidential campaign will start making their appearances right after the Mid-terms. Certainly both Carter and Clinton found that two years campaigning was hardly enough to get their faces known nation-wide. I think that the paper's notion for using future Conventions for ventilation of the issues by carefully moderated questioning by selected media representatives could be adapted to earlier campaign press conferences and appearances by Republican candidates. Perhaps the Republican National Committee could involve itself in trying to get more balanced press/media treatment for our several leading candidates by putting forward the enclosed paper's notion for semi-staged press conferences/debates. I am confident Republican candidates would welcome such opportunity to present well-prepared answers to previously submitted media questions. I'm not so sure the media would be happy to participate. But with insistence on the part of candidates that this is the way matters will in future be handled, I see no alternative but for the media to go along.
Am sending the paper prior to knowing the results of November 8, anticipating that people will start making announcements right away, and in hopes that you guys at headquarters can get some action going on what I think is a good notion (it certainly served DeGaulle well. I attended several of his performances in the Elysee while assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Paris).
Sincerely,
David B. Timmins, PhD (Harvard)
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |