♪ >> did you know you can view book tv programs online. go to booktv.org. type the name of the author, book, or subject into the search area in the upper left-hand corner of the page. select the watch link. now you can view the entire program. you might also explore the recently on book tv box or the featured programs box to find and view recent and featured programs. ♪ >> craig shirley author of reagan's revolution recounts ronald reagan's 1980 presidential campaign. mr. shirley follows president reagan from his defeat for the

presidency in 1976 to his election four years later over incumbent president jimmy carter. the ronald reagan presidential library in simi valley, california, is the host of this hour-long event. >> all right. now, craig and i are going to do something that hopefully you will find fun. rather than him getting up and giving a long 30-minute speech in which you, you know, struggle in your seat, i thought i'd interview craig, ask him a number of questions about his book. and then also throw it to the audience if you've got questions as well so we'd like to keep this as lively and as moving as possible so please as we move forward, if you've got something you want to throw up here, please just raise your hand but let me ask the first five or six questions. [laughter] >> does that sound good to you, craig. >> that's fine. >> in our archives here, craig,

we have hundreds and hundreds of president reagan radio addresses and when i saw he had that many radio addresses, i thought to myself, you know, from the outset right after the '76 convention to be on the air that much and then having read in your book the fact that he was also writing i think a biweekly news column, he was traveling around the country, you know, dozens and dozens of different speeches he was giving from the convention onward, it would seem to me that what must have happened at the time was campaign staff said well, we're not letting this go. from the moment you leave the convention, do all these things in order to position yourself to run for the presidency. was it that purposeful or was it more by happenence stance. the campaign after 1976 disapainted. the staff went their own way

with a exception of two men who were managing the political affairs and the commentaries and the syndicated columns of governor reagan's but it was not a grand plan that started after the convention if '76 for him to mount another challenge, a third challenge for the republican nomination in 1980. pretty much the campaign would all separate. and many of the staff were playing footsie with other campaigners. so compounding that was the fact that a lot of the staff from '76 thought that '76 was reagan's last shot and that he would not run again in 1980. that he would, in fact, be too old to run again in 1980. now, i think around 1978 it seems to me that president reagan, not even candidate

reagan at the time happened upon an issue that i'm sure he had been watching for years but it seemed to be the like the wedge issue in that time frame that really helped vaunt him back in the national dialog and that would be panama canal. for those old enough to remember, it was an enormously huge issue in this country. it was so huge in this country that president carter, who was fighting for the panama canal treaties in 1977 -- he's lobbying the senate. he's trying to muster across the street support for the canal treaties. he does something unprecedented for a president of the united states. in a national television address advocating the passage of the treaties, he attacks private citizen ronald reagan. he said there's a man going around this country who says we built it, we paid for it. it's ours and we're going to keep it and that's not quite true. now, imagine the president of

the citizen of the united states is attacking millions of people. cbs the next day calls governor reagan and says, governor, would you like 30 minutes of airtime to respond to the president of the united states and reagan thought about it for 3 minutes and he said you bet. he gave a 30 minute response to educators attack and carter's position on the canal treaties. the issue also brings up, too, fissures that were going inside the republican party because at the time reagan is trying to mount this have this grassroots campaign and bill brock wanted him to sign a direct mail piece for the republican national committee to oppose -- raise money to oppose the treaties and governor reagan said, sure, i'd love to. he signs the letter and makes over a million dollars for the republican national committee, which is -- it's still a lot of

money but a lot of money in 1977 and governor reagan is putting together a national truth squad to travel the country to mount a grassroots campaign to oppose the treaties and he goes to brock, and he says, bill, would you mind if i have some of the money that i raised for the truth squad. brock says, no. he wouldn't give him one dime and the reason brock wouldn't was because he was from tennessee. he and howard baker were good friends who was a senator minority leader who hadn't taken a position to the treaties. so reagan was furious as you can imagine with brock and with the republican national committee and after that never raised another dime for the rnc until after he took control of the party after he got the nomination in july of 1980. >> so he -- if i have my history correct, the panama canal treaty

actually passed. is it fair that president reagan lost the battle but won the wore in a sense that it positioned from a philosophical standpoint to help coalesce the conservative coalition. >> by the time of the passage of the treaties in the senate in the spring of 1978, the american people who two years before had supported the panama canal treaties now all the national polling has the american people vastly opposed to the panama canal treaties. reagan had convinced them even though, you're right, he lost the battle but he won the war because it coalesced a lot of the conservative movement for his eventual drive if 1980. >> can you tell us about jack kemp. i was not working on the hill at the time but by the time i got to capitol hill his name was already famous. he might have been a young republican and somewhat of a

back-bencher but it was remarkable that some of his idea, especially on supply-side economics, those he had gotten from others had found their way to ronald reagan. and reagan started espousing them, you know, quite early on. was kemp -- he was truly a very influential figure on reagan. >> somebody some day is going to have to do a book on how important jack kemp was to the conservative movement and the republican party. jack kemp was in mistaken ways he brought fire to the republican kind. he gave us is hopeful economic message which conservatism and republicanism had never had before. we had always been -- the republicans and the conservatives had been the green eye shade balance budget, you know, folks and the democrats were the party of hope and opportunity. their economic message was, you know, to spread the wealth or, you know, soak the rich or whatever. but we didn't have something that was hopeful.

in 19 of 1976, kemp has introduced what is called a jobs creation act in the house. he introduces this bill and it's brought to reagan's attention. what it is, it's a massive across-the-board personal income tax, 33% across-the-board for all americans. reagan sees not only the political opportunity here but what it also does economically for what he believes for the country and he endorses it immediately and in 1978, less than two years later, it is the centerpiece of this economic philosophy to the american people. and tax cuts were very important, too, for reagan for two reasons. everybody thinks it was all about stimulating the economy. and that's true. but from reagan's standpoint, he was developing and honing a message of optimistic conservatism. and part of that had to be a reliance on the self as opposed to the reliance on the state.

tax cuts were reduced the individual's reliance upon the state and increase their reliance upon themselves. that's what really attracted reagan to tax cuts was that it made the person, you know, give them more control of their own destiny. >> now, having read your book, it reminded me of just how many republican candidates saw the weak physicals in of jimmy carter. and decided i'm going to get into this. i mean, it seems like almost a dozen. maybe it was ten. do you recall how many? >> that ended up running? >> in the republican primaries. >> it ended up with 6 but there were 8 or 10 who looked at it including former president savior. ford. i know we went through all the republican primaries if 1980. it ended up towards the end versus a reagan versus george bush. do you have a view of all the others that were winnowed out of the field.

is there any particular candidate that really had more momentum had they run a better campaign and should have ended up in the finish line beyond bush or was it bush had run the best campaign next to reagan? >> i think bush had run the best campaign next to reagan and had run the most aggressive campaign and probably had the best campaign staff after reagan in some ways. i think that -- i always wondered why bob dole didn't catch fire more. certainly, he'd been on the ticket with gerald ford in 1976. he was a national political figure. he was a genuine war hero. he was a very effective, competent legislator from kansas. he had a beautiful story to tell. all-american story. but he never caught on with the voters and i could never figure out really why that never happened. >> now, while you have noted that president reagan obviously ran the best campaign, he was

victorious in the stories, you call it a blundering start. >> uh-huh. >> take us back to that time because the reagan presidency almost wasn't the reagan presidency because of the very bad start. what happened? >> what happened was this, was that after 1976, after kansas city, reagan does what he wants to do, which is to go out and to communicate to the american people his views on america, conservatism, the world, communism, opportunity, freedom. all those things he believed in. it's in june in 1977 alone he gives 13 major policy speeches. he's on the tonight show with johnny carson. he's testifying on capitol hill against the panama canal treaties. he's hither and yon and reagan was like a thoroughbred. the more you ran him, the better he ran. but if you pulled him off to the side and you put him in the stable, then he starts to get --

you know, his muscles start to atrophy. so he's doing this all through 1977, 1978. his campaign aids -- he's the front runner for the nomination for 1980 but his campaign year, the only way ronald reagan is going to lose the nomination is if he defeats himself in the primaries. so john sears and the people associated with john sears are on the road. and so this allows the other candidates to climb into contention. so by the time, if any, 79, ronald reagan who should have been the far and away front runner for the republican nomination is as a matter of fact only getting 28% of the support of republicans nationwide. and it was mainly because he had campaign aids who were telling him to go against his own instincts. his own instincts were to stay out there and talk to the american people. he'd only gone to new hampshire once in two years before the 1980 primary.

he hadn't been to iowa if years before the 1980 caucuses. he almost lost the nomination. >> they stuck it to him in iowa. >> yeah, exactly. he lost the iowa caucuses. it was new hampshire do or die. >> it was absolutely do or die for reagan. here's what's interesting is that the current primary process now is that new hampshire falls eight days after the iowa caucuses. if you'd taken the current primary schedule and overlaid it over the 1980 schedule, reagan would have lost the nomination. george bush would have won the nomination. ronald reagan would have become the williams jennings bryant of the republican party, a guy who ran three times and lost three times. what worked in reagan's favor were two things. one, himself, 'cause he decided to take control of his own destiny and number two was that new hampshire fell five weeks after the iowa caucuses which allowed him the time to get back into the race.

>> so i think what you're saying is if he had not -- if we took modern day schedule and overlaid it on the reagan campaign, he wouldn't have been president reagan. >> he would not have been president reagan. >> talk to me about new hampshire now. at least my impression is in modern day politics as big as debates may be played up to be in terms of their importance to a campaign, they're often, you know, slugfests and they end in draws but the -- at the nashua high school debate that you write about seems to be an extraordinary story. >> reagan leaves a story. he's collapsed in all the national polls. he's collapsed in the new hampshire polls. his campaign is heavily in debt. and still his campaign aids are saying, we'll just put a couple of days in new hampshire.

he tears up the script and he says i'm going to campaign the way i want to do. the age issue was a huge issue in 1979, 1980. what ends up happening is he's traveling and he's going so furious and he's going so fast that the political press traveling with him, he hang a sign in the bus that says free the reagan 44 because they're so exhausted from the pace being set by a man twice their age. going into the nashua telegraph debate and why it is so interesting and it shows a lot about ronald reagan was that reagan is losing in new hampshire. he needs a one-on-one debate with george bush to make his case of why he'd be a better nominee than george bush. as the debate negotiations going on, reagan slowly creeps up in the polls and all of a sudden now this table is turned so that bush now wants the other candidates involved.

then the federal election commission steps in and session, no, this newspaper cannot pay for the debate. it's an illegal corporate contribution and the reagan camp steps up and say we'll pay $3,000 for the debate. now you have again the tables have turned again, so that this is now the new hampshire -- the nashua telegraph is only three days before the primary. and reaganing is -- reagan is surging in the campaigns. bush puts his feet in granite and says absolutely not, these other candidates are not going to be involved. reagan says i'm paying for this. i think they should be involved. so what happens is you have this famous confrontation at nashua high school. there's 2500 people there. it's hotter than blazes inside. somebody described it, you know -- people yelling, screaming and said the melee -- somebody described it from like

the bar scene from star wars. [laughter] >> and so you have this -- where reagan tries to address the crowd. he calls the other four candidates, dole, connelly, crane and baker up on stage. and they're labeled the nashua 44. he wants to address the crowd and why the other candidates should be involved and the sound man is told turn off his microphone. turn off his microphone. and they won't turn off the microphone. and reagan grabs the microphone and he stands up. and he takes a step toward and you look at the video, he's going to hit him. [laughter] >> he was so mad. you know, his aid said -- they'd never seen reagan as bad as they saw that night and his hands were shaking and that's where he famously thundered i'm paying for this microphone, mr. brine. >> a classic moment. so after all that tumult and that was just the beginning, 'cause, you know, from reading your book, there's no question it harkens you back to a time

when that was a very tough campaign. as it went down to the wire between reagan and bush. and as a former staff person in the bush administration i ask this question with, you know, all due respect. what is -- you know, when you read your book it's just surprising when you see with the speed that president reagan decided towards the end to ask george bush to come on the ticket. there was a lot of back room negotiations involving former president ford but could you just bring us back to that time because it's just remarkable to me with such a tough campaign and the camps were so bitterly opposed to each other that the president reached out his hand to bring bush on the ticket. >> there was a history there between governor reagan and ambassador bush who's not -- they ended up being the best of friends and mutual respect and all around. but it proves the old adage that politics does make strange bell

folios. they had a history that started out a little bit rocky. there was a congressional candidate down in texas, george w. bush who was running for congress in 1978 and he had a conservative primary opponent. a fellow by the time of jimmy reese who's the mayor of odessa. reagan endorsed reese over bush and contributed to his campaign. and this did not set well with the bush family as you can imagine. as a matter of fact ambassador bush called then-governor reagan to complain about him endorsing the son's opponent. so you already had that situation. and then, of course, bush is running in the primaries against reagan and the age issue again as i can't underestimate how big the age issue was in '79 through '80. it was shot through every story that was written or reported about reagan, about was he too old and up to the task and all this?

and bush is trying to exploit this as any other campaign would. you know, he's jogs to the media. he goes to the ymca and does push-ups for the benefit of the national media. it's all to exacerbate the age issue. so you had that. and then on top of that you have bush attacking reagan's politics as voodoo economics. by the time you get to detroit really on paper if you look at it, the guy who made the most sense was george bush because he was somewhat more moderate. he had a proven vote-getting ability in the primaries in the northeast. he'd won the pennsylvania primary and the michigan primary and massachusetts and others. he had more foreign policy experience. and he was the guy who was going to be the one who would best unify the convention because as you know as we all know, unified conventions tend to win in the

fall and divided conventions tend to lose in the fall. and there's a part on governor reagan and mrs. reagan taking george bush because of these lingering issues being left unaddressed. this one day of what is just madness in detroit where they try to put together the copresidency which some of you would remember the gerald ford, the dream ticket where, you know, he had reagan running for president and they tried to get gerald ford it off serve -- to run as vice president. i always thought jim baker had the best line on the whole situation. because if you had reagan and -- reagan and ford elected as president and vice president, would you address ford as mr. president, mr. vice president or address him as mr. vice president, mr. president? [laughter] so in any event you had this whole day where there was negotiations and it was carried out on national television between walter cronkite and

gerald ford and the copresidency and rumors being passed along from delegate to delegate. it all made it onto network television and it all recycled back and you had a day of madness whether or not there was going to be a dream ticket or a copresidency. would they address the convention in unison? and at the end of the day, ford and reagan, this is now 11:30 at night. this is the night ronald reagan has been nominated by the republican party. he's tried three times for the nomination. he finally gets it. and he can't savor it because he doesn't have a running mate. and at 11:30 that night, after all these negotiations -- and i need to tell you, too, about henry kissinger's role in this. they go in a room for five minutes, the two of them in detroit, and they come out and reagan tells the guys -- tells peter and lynn and dick allen and others, i can't tell you what's going on but it's not going to work. and so they sit there 11:30 at

night and reagan is looking at the aids and he says, well, fellows, what do we do now? he's got no running mate. and finally after a few moments, peter hanford said, i think it's time to call george bush. and he calls george bush is just blown away. had no idea. he was convinced like everybody else in america that gerald ford was going to go on the ticket with reagan. >> so let me ask one more question before i throw it to the audience for any questions they may have and it directly follows on that and it goes back to jack kemp. why did his star not rise at least high enough to be more seriously in consideration for the vice president? >> there was a lot of affection on the part of the delegates and governor reagan for jack camp and that comes through in all the people i talked to and all the material that i went through. there were probably -- the biggest thing that kept kemp off the ticket with reagan was that the aids felt like it would be

too much to ask the american people to swallow a ticket of a former movie actor and a former profootball player. it might have been too much to ask the american people innianne 80. -- in 1980. the delegates really wanted -- really wanted jack kemp and, of course, the reagans' personal preference was paul axle. he was conservative. nevada only had three electoral votes. reagan was going to carry it anyway so it wasn't like it added anything to the ticket. >> at this point do you have any questions from folks in our studio audience? [laughter] >> don't be shy. if you do, okay, oh, we have many questions.

>> normally we would hand you a microphone but i'm thinking because of our technical difficulties, we might just have you -- >> the only question you alluded to the henry kissinger connection, and i want to hear what that is. >> can you go ahead and repeat the question for her. >> henry kissinger was negotiating the treaty on detroit on behalf of gerald ford. and kissinger was a pretty tough negotiator. of course, he had negotiated the peace with honor, the withdrawal from vietnam. and after these tough negotiations in detroit that day, one of the reagan aids says is that -- is that, you know, for the first time -- you know, after dealing with kissinger all day, he said for the first time in my life i felt sorry for the north vietnamese. [laughter] >> i know we had a few other questions that had some questions. yes, sir. if you could -- i know this is a bit unusual, but when you ask your question, come up to the front and ask us 'cause we just

want to make sure we are able to record it on the microphone. >> in the early days, was he well served by his advisors? and it seems to me when he made serious error is when he did not go with his intuition. >> absolutely. absolutely. reagan was at his best when he relied on his own judgment and his own temperament. i think also what comes through in the book and what came through at the time was that reagan was best when he was mad. he really -- dick worth never knew a competition as much as ronald reagan. he relished confrontation.

this idea that reagan floated from opportunity to opportunity is nonsense. everything he had in his life he fought for. and when he took matters into his own hands, as he did in new hampshire and won the primary, and as he did in the fall when he decided and, you know, that he was going to debate jimmy carter, that reagan was best off when he took matters -- his own career and matters into his own hands. absolutely. >> any other questions. over here. >> it's an honor to give you an modern. -- microphone. [laughter] >> dr. shirley, a question. [laughter] >> you spent an enormous amount of time studying the campaigns, the '76 campaign and the '80 campaign and yet most academics focus on 1981, january, 1981 to 1989.

what is it that you have learned from those campaigns about ronald reagan that we don't learn from studying his presidency? >> yeah, good question. is what i learned was how much the republican party establishment opposed ronald reagan. is that -- there was almost a corrupt bargain in the late '70s between some elements of the republican party establishment and the media because this age issue was really corrosive. and it finally together reagan. you know, this is a guy who's 68 years old. he tossed it up about jokes with his age and, you know, no, he's not getting older. he just keeps riding older-looking horses. he handled it all so very well. but, you know, the media kept pounding on it and the republican party kept pounding on it. and it makes sense in a way because this was a guy who took it to the republican party establishment.

starting in january, 1977, now, gerald ford has lost to jimmy carter. the republican party has been decimated in the down particular races of '76 compounded by the fact they'd been decimated in '74. in 1977 only one state in america has republican control of the governorship and the legislature, that's kansas. 49 other states have near or total democratic control of their state governments. there are states in the south that don't even have elected republicans in any constitutional office. that's how bad off it is. and only 18% of the american people claim allegiance to the republican party and only 11% of voters under 30 claim allegiance to the republican party. so reagan looks at the landscape and says, we can do better than this. so he goes out there and he starts giving speeches about the new republican party that he envisioned. the new republican party on vision cannot be the party of the corporate board room. it cannot be the party of the country club.

it's got to be the party of the individual. not the state. it's got to be the party of the man on the street, the cop on the street, the homemaker, the shop keeper and the entrepreneur. but it cannot be the party that it's been in the last 30 years because this isn't working. well, the eptrembled remaining elites of the republican party don't like this. who's this maverick populace coming out of california to tell us how to run our party. you know, he was just a democrat, you know, 15, 18 years ago. and so the one thing i learned was that how many -- the long answer to a very good and short question was that how tough a road to hoe it was for ronald reagan in 1976 and 1980. you know, we all look back now 29 years later, the gauze of history, and say, oh, yeah, i was for ronald reagan in 1980. it's not true. it's that many, many elements inside the republican party were opposed to ronald reagan. and sometimes viciously opposed to ronald reagan. >> interesting insight.

okay. i get a question. we have a number of friends in common that have done polling for the republican party for many years. and my sense of the results from the 1980 race were that reagan was one of those rare individuals who found a way at the time to stitch together these emerging coalitions within the party, you know, the set of economic conservatives who were quite different than those who might be foreign policy conservatives who again were quite different than a whole circle of people who might be social conservatives. and i think his success in great part was he found a way to drive an issue set that would pull all those constituencies together to create a majority coalition, right? do you see that as being possible in today's modern day republican party? [laughter] >> john, not only do i see it

possible, it has to happen for the republican party to survive. is what reagan saw -- reagan's organizing philosophy was freedom. the democratic party from the time of the new deal up until today, the organizing philosophy has been justice. justice you have to have, you know, big government to enforce justice. but freedom really on him needs a constitution, a bill of rights, intelligent cultures and a police force. reagan's republican party was organized around the concept of freedom that the individual was more important than the state and that the privacy and the dignity of the individual were more important than anything else in this country. the republican party has drifted away from that in the last eight years. and became essentially the second big government party in america.

so voters when faced with a voice from the real big government party in the america, the democrats or the fake big government. i think the republican party -- you know, if you look at this practically, is this is a nation of over 300 million he people. it's vast. it's huge. it's diverse. and i think it's very arrogant to think that we can govern this country from one corrupt city on the potomac river. so that really that localism you can call it -- you can call it populist conservatism but to meet the needs of the american people to handle most things at the state and localities and individuals the way jefferson envisioned it as opposed to -- and the way reagan envisioned it as opposed to what we have today. [inaudible] >> please, if you have a question -- >> fight back. do what the tea party protesters are doing.

do what the town hall protesters. >> i heard about the tea parties and they said the republican tea parties. >> no, that's right. [inaudible] >> well, i think part of what we have to do -- fortunately, we have our own way to communicate with each other now. we don't to have depend, abc, nbc, and cbs. >> so far. >> so far. but we have other ways but what's interesting is if you look at recent polling data is that 40% of the american people call themselves conservative while only 20% call themselves republican. i think that speaks volumes about the state of the republican party in america today is that -- but it's the way it was in 1977. history has repeated itself. the republican party because of nixon, because of ford, because of the corruption of watergate, because of the fickleness of gerald ford, because of the ties to corrupt corporate elites became, you know, a minority

party. and so now we're -- now they are again in the minority. the way back is what reagan said. reagan said don't trust me. trust yourself. he eviscerated the trust-me government of jimmy carter. and what the republicans have to understand is that they have to take it to the trust-me government of barack obama. >> okay. i'm sorry. [inaudible] >> what were reagan's views and his position on -- [inaudible] >> on federal reserve? >> what were his views in the federal reserve? and all the income tax? >> well, he was once asked in 1980 about a particular tax cut and he says, i favor a tax cut anytime. i don't know what his -- well, but he reformed it in 1986 when he was president and, of course, in 1981, the tax system was the

top marginal rate was 70%. he brought that down to, you know, the high 20s. so we knew what his attitude was about the tax system. and also, of course, you had, you know, the series of rising steps on the tax system and it was simplefied down to three simple tax rates. [inaudible] >> well, let me just say one thing. i don't know if i can address that specifically except that ronald reagan was always suspicious of any concentration of power, whatsoever. he saw a concentration of power, whether it was by corporate america or by government as a threat to individual freedoms. and too much concentration of power inevitably led to corruption. so i hope that answers your question. >> i think we have another question over here. oh, right over here. thank you.

>> getting back to the book, john sears, in 1976, a friend and i cornered reagan in new hampshire and asked him for permission to run as delegates of reagan from new york. reagan gave us is total blessing. it couldn't be more enthusiastic and he said go ahead and do it. that was reagan being reagan. so we went around the corner and talked to john sears and he said absolutely not. he had made a deal with the republicans in new york that they would run an uncommitted slate and maybe they'd go for him and maybe they wouldn't but if we challenged them they would never gore him so he lost every seat, every delegate in new york as a result. >> not every one. >> i'm talking about '76. >> fred was a reagan delegate. >> but that was the point. the point was he wouldn't let -- sears would not let anybody else run. fred got there because he was a senator. >> right. [inaudible] >> good.

>> anyway, sears said don't do that. four years later, of course, reagan has learned this lesson. and fred eckert and a bunch of us ran, won, and we carried all but about six delegates in the state of new york. swapped the uncommitted slate. so my question is, why did he wait so long to dump sears? [laughter] >> which he -- which he did after the january -- after the new hampshire primary. >> the day of the new hampshire primary. is that, you know, you got to remember national politics was vastly, vastly different in '1 1974 and '75. john sears was nixon's delegate hub. he was a primo republican operative in the 1970s. and the reagan folks were out here, you know, after 1974, he

leaves the second term of the governorship here. and they're intimidated by national politics because it's dominated by the east coast party operatives. it's dominated by the national media. they don't know the national operatives very well. they don't know the national media very well. up pops this guy, john sears, who had ran ford's campaign but got passed over because, you know, drew spencer and rog morton and others were running it. so he ends up, you know, running reagan's campaign but this is a great acquisition in the eyes of the national media because they didn't know much about this guy, reagan, from california. even after all of his careers in hollywood and the lecture circuit. 3,000 miles is a long way. you don't have the internet, talk radio, cell phones. it's a big country. and most of those guys are 3,000 miles away. so the guy they do know, john

sears, who has got all this national political experience -- he's going to run reagan's campaign. well, that really impresses the national media. but reagan comes close as we all know in 1976. some say because john got them close. others say because john messed up in new york. and in ohio and in new jersey and other primaries. but there wasn't a good, acceptable backup which is why it took so long to fire john in 1980 because there wasn't anybody of john's stature. and the other thing weighing on reagan and actually mrs. reagan as well was the fact that john had had all these friends in the national media and reagan's campaign in all of '1979 and

'80, bad press, the age issue is still there. and he doesn't need another spat of bad political stories, you know, by firing his campaign manager because if he fires john, that means john's two top aids, charlie black and jim lake are going to go with him. so they arrive at this strategy to fire him of the day of the new hampshire primary, believing they will win the primary and it would minimize the story and because they found an acceptable alternative. it's a very long question to -- a very long answer to a good question. >> when you read craig's book you get to this roughly 100-page section where almost every page you're saying, why isn't he firing him? why isn't he firing him? oh, you finally he gets to the new hampshire piece but i'll ask you this, i don't know if it's relevant to the campaigns. it certainly seems like it was relevant to the president's administration. we had here last week former

attorney general ed meese, former national security advisor dick allen and this subject actually came up having nothing to do with john sears but the topic of apparently it was very, very difficult for ronald reagan to fire anyone. in other words, he just didn't like to do it. now, he brought himself to do it, you know, because of the importance of the act and they're in new hampshire. have you picked up any of that in your research? was that part of the reason? >> you know, if he had any failings or flaws is that he gave too many people too many second chances. but he knew that sears was not the guy who's going to run the '80 campaign. so he actually -- he and mrs. reagan sat down with bill clark and asked bill clark if he would run the campaign. of course, judge clark was chief justice of the california state supreme court. he had some important cases coming up and so he demurred but the three of them went through a list and they came up with this fellow bill casey who had worked

on the nixon administration. and so they reached out to bill casey and he ended up replacing john. but it's really because reagan had been pushed, you know, hard enough that he had to -- he just had to get rid of john. and as a matter of fact, charlie black, i think, had one of the wisest takes on john sears ease role in the campaign. he said that ronald reagan never would have been president if he hadn't hired john sears in 1975 and fired him if 1980. -- fired him in 1980. [laughter] >> i don't know if either of you read craig's book or heard about it and it's getting great reviews. one of the news items that's popping out in these reviews is the story about putting the finger on the individual that you believe was involved in this famous incident of the theft and the turning over of the campaign debate materials of president carter. can you just go over that a

little bit with us. >> there's an old fellow i knew by the name of paul corbin -- he was pretty much of a rogue. i got his fbi file. and it was 2,000 pages. corbin was in the '40s and '50s was a labor communist organizer here in the united states with, you know, various labor unions out in the midwest and he ran various scams and he was arrested several times. he ended up running wisconsin for jfk in 1960. and then wisconsin after that. and became very close to bobby kennedy and was on the kennedy family payroll from the early '60s to the day he died in 1991. he was on the payroll of the joseph p. kennedy foundation, the merchandising mart which the kennedys owned in chicago. he, of course, was supporting ted kennedy in the primaries over jimmy carter in 1980.

and, of course, as we all know, is that senator kennedy lost and lost badly to jimmy carter. and the kennedy family was furious with carter in 1980 because he ran what they thought was a very vicious campaign against senator kennedy. and corbin took it upon himself to exact -- meet out revenge, so he secreted the campaign briefing documents, the carter briefing books out of the carter white house and gave them to billier who by that time was running the reagan campaign. in fact, casey put paul corbin as a retainer. he had a background in working with communist party politics, labor politics. had been arrested numerous times for running scams in the midwest and was, you know, all sorts of criminal activities and, of course, governor reagan doesn't know anything about this,

whatsoever. the irony the briefing books when i interviewed president carter he to this day he believes he lost because the reagan campaign got the briefing books. but the irony is that the briefing books were nothing more than a compellation of reagan's speeches, radio commentaries, columns, various interviews over 30 years and if there's one man in america in 1980 who knew where he stood and knew where he stood for the previous 30 years it was ronald reagan. so the briefing books were useless. but it was a huge issue in washington in 1983. but when it became -- it was found out three years later that the briefing books had been taken out of the carter white house. >> any other questions out there? i know i've got a few more if -- yes, sir. >> what was it about sears that

made him so hated and so detested among the people that he worked for that he was called john satan -- >> john p. satan instead of john p. sears. conservatives -- everybody had their own reason to be mad at john. is that in 1976, the conservatives including especially my old friend thought that he was trying to moderate reagan's positions and then in 1980 what he's doing is he picking off one old reagan ally after another. marty emerson is first forced out. then lynn is forced out. and it really came to almost blows -- this is another thing in the book, too. is now on the eve of the new hampshire primary, now john is trying to get ed meese out of the reagan campaign and they have this meeting. mrs. reagan, reagan, john sears and john's two principal aids.

and they had this meeting in new hampshire that goes into 2:30 in the morning and nothing is resolved. and they're trying to take -- john is -- john is trying to get ed out of the campaign. and reagan finally explodes. and he stands up and he says, you're not going to get ed, by god, and he's moving towards sears and charlie and mrs. reagan have to get him between the two because it looked like reagan was going to punch sears. he was so mad at him for trying to take out his old friend, ed meese. and so they ended up in the middle and charlie is getting john out of the room as fast as possible. reagan is still yelling at him. so john finally had just made one enemy too many and he had to go. >> okay. a couple last questions. the first is, obviously, towards the tail end of the '80 campaign, many people were on the edge of their seat because

of the potential for the negotiations by president carter to obtain the release of the hostages being held in iran. i know this is somewhat speculative, but knowing what you know about the race and the poll numbers at the time and all the, you know, concern and debate over that issue, if iran had let the hostages loose prior to the election do you think that would have been enough to make a difference so that carter could have been victorious? >> no. i'll tell you why. and i thought about that a lot, john. the american people had become so cynical about carter and the hostages. and by november of 1980, a majority think that carter has used, has manipulated the hostages for political purposes. it was the morning of the wisconsin primary. teddy kennedy has gotten off the mat in the democratic party primaries. he's won new york and cohn.

-- connecticut. the next primary is wisconsin. and he's surging and it looks like he might be beat carter on this primary. carter goes on national television that morning to announce a, quote-unquote, major breakthrough. a lot of you will remember. he unexpectedly wins the wisconsin primary at a time when people thought kennedy might pull it off. there was no major breakthrough. and there was never an explanation of why there was there wasn't a major breakthrough. and i still remember david broder, the grand old man of the "washington post," wrote a piece -- a column just eviscerating the president and basically accusing him in no uncertain terms that he was using the plight of the hostages to advance his political fortunes. and that actually there was polling data that came out in october of 1980 that said the american people by the vast majority said if we had to make any concessions, whatsoever, to the iranians, to get the hostages back it would be better for them to stay there than to

make any concessions. they'd actually become more hawkish on the issue than even reagan was. >> okay. one last question for you. as we all know, history shows, i think, the president took -- president reagan took 44 states and was victorious in that election. but what i was interested -- your book reminded me of even the weekend before the election, the poll numbers on both camps had the race still a point or two difference, right? it was a remarkably close race. then over the weekend, it just absolutely tumbled over for president carter's campaign. have you done much research to understand why that happened. it was a vast tsunami. >> it wasn't the first time where reagan broke lake and won a campaign big. new hampshire -- the day of the new hampshire primary all the polls and all the newspapers were saying too close to call. and the primary that was

supposedly too close to call reagan wins 50 to 23 over george bush. but there were other races. i think in some cases, some people were reluctant to tellsters -- pollsters that they really, really liked this guy. that people waited in some cases and then decided that he's an acceptable alternative. as far as the collapse, it was partially because of the last breakdown of the hostage negotiations, but it was also because of the debate, the cleveland debate the week before that that really started the process. reagan, of course, as we all know, he and carter debated one week before the election. still to this day, the most watched presidential debate in american history, over 105 million people watched it. >> that's the there you go again. >> and that's the line everybody remembers is that when carter was attacking reagan over his

opposition to medicare, back in the early '60s, and when reagan, you know, turned and said that, but i really think when reagan closed the sale with the american people, that's the line everybody remembers but he i think he closed the sale with the american people with his 3-minute summation when he looked in the camera and he looked into people's living rooms and said to millions and millions of people are you better off than you were four years ago. that was the line that closed the sale with the american people. in the days afterwards, all the elites at the "new york times" and cbs and the "washington post" all said carter won the debate. all the american people and all the polling data said, reagan won the debate. and as i said in the book is just that the distinction between the two was the difference between an amusingly -- an amusing little chardonnay and a frosty bottle of cold beer. [laughter] >> well, look, it's just been absolutely terrific to have you

here, craig. it's just been great to be on stage asking questions of you and taking it from the audience. you've been so insightful and i personally found your book just absolutely terrific for those of you who have not read it, it is well worth your while so thank you again for coming. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> craig shirley is the president of shirley & banister public affairs, a marketing and government relations firm. he's also the author of "reagan's revolution." his writing has appeared in the weekly standard and the "washington post." to find out more, visit craigshirley.com. >> every year the national press club hosts an author night. tonight i'm with pamela newkirk. can you tell me a little bit about your book. >> yes, it's a compellation of

african-american letters and what i try to do is present a multidimensional portrait of black life through their own letters so it includes the letters of extraordinary people who many have heard of like dr. martin luther king and benjamin baniker and ida b. wells and unsung people, slaves, just ordinary people throughout history. >> can you give me an example of one of these unsung people. >> oh, sure. there are many -- several letters from slaves who had who were just writing to each other, to family members from whom they'd been separated, you know, letting them know how they are and trying to find out how they're loved ones are faring. not people we would have known of. >> how did you come upon this project and how do you select the letters? >> well, that was pretty insane. i went through thousands of letters over the course of five years. and some of the themes naturally

emerged so i wanted to look at black family life through letters. and so after a while there was sort of an organizing principle through these themes and then i arranged them chronologically. but i tried to kind of create a narrative to show the historical arc so the book begins with the letters of people in the 1700s. some were slaves and some like benjamin baniker who was writing this powerful letter to thomas jefferson was free and one of the last letters in the book was written in 2008 by alice walker who wrote barack obama to congratulate -- you know, to say what his election meant. so it has this amazing arc showing the history of african-americans enslaved and free over three centuries. >> you're a journalism professor at nyu. what surprised you in your study of these letters? >> i guess one of the things that surprised me is the extent

to which enslaved african-americans continued to communicate with their loved ones or even that even -- that slaves wrote letters at all. but the extent to which they maintained bonds across plantations, across states, across -- and, of course, this was an illegal act. but they somehow managed to stay in contact to the best they could with their loved ones. >> now, regular book tv viewers may recognize you 'cause we shot a program of yours earlier in the year which you can watch on booktv.org. you can go to our website and watch that program. what are you working on right now? >> right now i'm still here with this book. this is probably my 40th event since february. and we've also been doing a number of dramatic readings across the country. we did a reading recently the ruby dee and anthony chisholm. so we've been working on a dramatic production as well

based on the book. i have not even gotten to my next writing project. >> between your teaching and between your promoting of your book, do you have time to read? >> i do have time to read and i usually read more than one book at a time. two books -- i recently re-read gore vidal's "lincoln," which was a great read because in new york, there's an exhibit on lincoln at the new york historical society so that was an incredible way to look at that exhibit. and i also read "ida" that is amazing. and right now i just started "the help." it's fiction. i don't normally read fiction but it's a good read. >> the author is pamela newkirk. she's the author of "letters from black america." thank you very much. >> thank you. >> you've been watching book tv on c-span2. .