60s Assassinations

[tom]

No killing of the Kennedys or King. What changes?

[Grey Wolf]

Originally Posted by tom

No killing of the Kennedys or King. What changes?

Oliver Stone chooses to make a different film starring Kevin Kostner ?

Grey Wolf

[Straha]

60's never end

[tom]

In the same spirit, Dion never records his best record.
Come on now, seriously...

[PM Nixon]

Good question.

THe 1964 election will still be a victory for JFK, but it will be a much closer affair than OTL's election. Without the mudslinging of LBJ, and without the death of a president in the background, Goldwater will make greater progress in garnering votes for conservative Republicans.

The second term will see renewed efforts by the Kennedy Administration in the area of Civil Rights. Again, though, without his death it will be much harder for the bills to be passed. However, if LBJ is used to gain votes on the Hill, then we'll see some Civil Rights legislation, although a year or two off.

Vietnam is a huge question mark. I see three scenarios here:


1. Kennedy eventually buys the Dominio Theory and, despite re-election promises, goes into Vietnam in 1965 with huge military buildups. The war is fought similar to OTL, with the Kennedy administration taking heat from Liberal Democrats and also from MLK in 1967 and 1968. In 1968, the Republicans still choose Richard Nixon, while the Democrats are torn between several candidates. LBJ decides not to run, partly due to health concerns and partly due to seeing his candidacy jepardized by being linked to the unpopular war. Hubert Humphrey, Eugene McCarthy, and Robert Kennedy duke it out in the primary contests. The Kennedy brothers of John and Robert are at odds over the war effort, and while Bobby is against the war, the simple fact that he stayed on as Attorney General in this OTL cripples his campaign. Also, he and McCarthy split the anti-war vote, opening Humphrey's rise to the Democratic nomination. Humphrey, rising above the links to the war that hurt him OTL help him to an even closer election, but he still loses to Nixon. John Kennedy is remembered as a man who was full of promise for a new age in American history, but dropped the ball in Vietnam. Robert Kennedy eventually makes a run for the Senate in the 70s, winning a seat along with his brother Edward. MLK, meanwhile, became one of Kennedy's harshest critics on the war and on the poverty issue in America. He gets into conflict with the Black Panthers and other radical groups on one side, and with the Nixon administration on the other. When Watergate unfolds as in OTL, he decides it may be time for him to step into the political arena....I'll have to think about this some more.

2. Kennedy goes into Vietnam, but succeeds with using his charm to sell the war. It becomes more like Korea, and although King still makes some fuss about it, most people pay him little attention when it comes to the war in Vietnam. With John's blessing, Robert Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey survive an election year charge by Richard Nixon and Spiro T. Agnew in a less hostile 1968 election. In 1972, the people tire of the Kennedys in the White House, and he is defeated by the Republicans. (Possibly Ronald Regan or Rockefeller.) King, meanwhile, continues to fight for labor rights and against poverty.


3. Kennedy doesn't send troops in at all, allowing Vietnam to fall despite considerable financial aid and air support. The Republicans lambast the President for being "soft on Communism", but he points out his work during the Cuban Missile Crisis and also the Space Race success for America. From here it goes pretty much as two, except maybe a larger margin due to the lack of real attention on Vietnam.


I know there's some more I could think of, but I hope you like it.

[PM Nixon]

What, no one shall comment on my masterpiece?

Actually, though, I think I'll expand upon my first Vietnam scenario. I could see King criticizing JFK for the War in Vietnam, and also Nixon in 1969. It may get harder for MLK with the Nixon administration, although he'll be needed as a "buffer" against radical elements within the Civil Rights movement. Maybe a home front realpolitik?

[Grey Wolf]

Originally Posted by PM Nixon

What, no one shall comment on my masterpiece?

Lol, I read it and thought it pretty good

Grey Wolf

[Beck Reilly]

Kennedy's undeserved prestige as a President would not be touted as in OTL. The man was a horrible President and a horrible man. Had he lived, we would view Kennedy nowadays as A) a failure as a President, B) a scumbag of the first order, or, if we decide to be nice, C) a releative incompetant. Kennedy was martyred by Lee Harvey Oswald. That's the only reason why anyone even *thinks* about him today. Had he not been killed, he would have been a forgettable, awful President.

[PM Nixon]

Originally Posted by Walter_Kaufmann

Kennedy's undeserved prestige as a President would not be touted as in OTL. The man was a horrible President and a horrible man. Had he lived, we would view Kennedy nowadays as A) a failure as a President, B) a scumbag of the first order, or, if we decide to be nice, C) a releative incompetant. Kennedy was martyred by Lee Harvey Oswald. That's the only reason why anyone even *thinks* about him today. Had he not been killed, he would have been a forgettable, awful President.

OUCH!!!

A bit harsh, don't you think? Although, I must admit, I agree with you a little. He does get alot of hero worship, which I don't think he entirely deserved. But, we'll never know if he could've accomplished more...thus, we have AH.

That could be even worse if he goes through Vietnam as in my scenario #1.

Thanks, Grey Wolf!