Nixon wins in 1960

Let’s say that Richard Nixon wins the 1960 elections instead of JFK. In OTL, the election was very close, so let’s say that butterflies make sure that Nixon wins. Now what?

I assume that the Soviets won’t mess with Nixon the way they did with Kennedy in OTL, they knew and respected him. So no Cuban Missile Crisis and possibly no Berlin Crisis either.

Now my first question; what about Civil Rights? I’ve heard that Nixon’s running mate; Henry Cabot Lodge, jnr once pledged that if Nixon became President, he would name at least one African American to a cabinet position. This annoyed some conservative Republicans and made Nixon lose some votes in the South, so maybe Nixon dumps Lodge before the 1964 elections.

Second question; Space. I doubt that Nixon shared JFK's interest in space. However, he would probably do something to prevent Soviet dominance in that area.

Third question; Cuba and Vietnam. Many people assume that Nixon, the Cold Warrior, would use full force with Bay of Pigs Invasion and succesfully manages to take over Cuba. However, is there chance that Cuba would become an ATL Vietnam; a controversial war which would be a political humiliation for the US. And what about Vietnam itself?

Final question; would Nixon win reelection in 1964? I assume he does but fails to win a second term. I think that Americans, after 12 years of Republican rule, would be ready for change. Some would probably have voters regret, regret that they’ve voted for Nixon and not Kennedy.

But who would be Kennedy’s opponent? Some people say JFK, since Adlai Stevenson faced Eisenhower in ’52 and ’56, I assume that the same would for JFK. However, JFK suffered from Addison Disease which could either kill him before the elections or render him incapable of running again. Maybe instead, Hubert Humphrey or Lyndon Johnson run instead.

Thoughts?

Well, for a POD, I'd say Nixon doesn't get sick and hence doesn't look harried and unkempt on the debates. While OTL most people listening on the radio thought Nixon had won, the visual was pretty poor; TTL, Nixon wins the debates.

1) Civil Rights
Well, it will need to take a different course than it did OTL because Nixon will be trying to get something passed by a Democratic Congress. I would imagine that he would favor something like the 64' Civil Rights Act, just as OTL he favored all sorts of government programs (EPA, Wage&Price Controls, taking the US off the gold standard). A parallel to the voting rights act may emerge because of the play for a new consituency. He may also either try to limit the amount of protest going on or simply speak out against it.

2) Space
I'm not sure. Obviously, you won't have JFK's pledge. Under Eisenhower, the administration knew that there really wasn't a missile or bomber gap, but under JFK, Kennedy's lack of expereince drove him to be more pliable to Cold War concerns. Without the need to show up the Soviets, the Space Race may not get the press it did OTL, but there's still the need to counter Sputnik in some way. Probably a Space Program with a more leisurely pace, depending on how dangerous Nixon thinks the Soviet space program might be.

3) Cuba, Vietnam...And the Middle East...And China (or lack thereof)
Staying out of Vietnam seems fairly simple: Nixon invovled in the *Bay of Pigs makes the compotent decision to stay out, though he does sell arms to the South Vietnamese. The reaction of Cuba depends on the tenor of the conflict: if it's well managed and an effort to restore something like democratic rule, then it might succeed. Also, he could simply replay the OTL invasion, but supply air cover, and the Cubanos themselves might have a chance, without US ground forces. Nixon will also have to manage the reaction of Latin America to this adventure.

Nevertheless, I think the wider question is Nixon's engagement with the Soviet Union and foreign affairs in general. OTL, most of his accomplishments came there, but the circumstances will be very different. I could seem him following up on Eisenhower's strong interest in securing the Middle East. He will probably not have the opportunity to go to China.

The USSR will also need to respond to the debacle in Cuba, which may lead to some kind of action that needs to be contained elsewhere. Or they just make a big deal about Vietnam.

Nevertheless, some major butterflies follow.

4) Re-election

Well, it's uncertain. If he's too strong on civil rights, then he may face a primary challenge (difficult, since the system wasn't as strong in '64) from a conservative like Goldwater. If Cuba goes poorly, then Eugene McCarthy or the like could easily run on a Peacenik platform. I think JFK is probably out in 1964: he won't have Stevenson's expereince, which earned him the second shot in 1956. Johnson might try for a run, but I'm not sure if he ever had presidential ambitions per se; he was a real legislator and may prefer the Senate. Nevertheless, he may be a good alternative to McCarthy as a Social Program Southerner.

Overall, I don't think the deck is necessarily stacked against Nixon in 1964. If he pursues Civil Rights correctly, then he will probably extend his base of support while simultaneously forcing the Democrats to either oppose his reforms or lose the South. I'd say Nixon easily defeats Goldwater for the nomination (he may even run something similar to the bomb commercials of LBJ's OTL campaign), but he might think about replacing Lodge since he no longer counters Kennedy in Massachusetts; he also might keep him since California and the Northeast make a tidy electoral package. Nixon will also appear strong in the general because if he performs as OTL, he will have enacted modest social programs, environmental reforms, and civil rights, but he will appear measured against the Democrats. If Conservatives and the Deep South try to defect, their third party pid probably does not cost Nixon the White House. Now the more interesting story is 1968: will the South remaign alienated? Will blacks really support the GOP? How will the Democrats try to counter sixteen years of the GOP in the White House?

Nixon was highly Neurotic, trust nobody and anti communist.
Kennedy had tight grip on military and administration, wat Nixon had not.
(see his "none" Presidency from 1969 to 1974 )

His anti communist views could taken by SAC General Le May as "do wat you want with dam USSR!"
(to end of his 1969-1974 Presidency, Nixon orded several time the use of nuclear weapons. mostly wenn he was drunk or under influence of painkiller. lucky the 1970s SAC staff ignorde those orders. a Le May NOT)

a 1960 President Nixon has events he can not escape

1. C.I.A plans for "Bay of Pigs" in April 1961
2. The Berlin Wall Crisis in October 1961
3. The Cuba Missile Crisis in October 1962
4. The Vietnam War

the C.I.A made mess from ther Cuba invasion Plans
last minute chance to a new landingzone called the "Bay of Pigs"
wat the C.I.A dint know, this is Castro favoir fishing ground
there so the heavy garded bay in all Cuba...

of curse he can order a US Invasion of Cuba so no Cuba Missile crisis
but Internationaly USA would stand as Bad Guy
USSR will use that argument in U.N. and a lot 3 world contury would take the side of USSR against USA.

the Berlin Wall
Nikita Khrushchev wanted West Berlin part of D.D.R.
and all NATO troops out.

04 June 1961. Khrushchev and Nixon meet in Vienna
(after 17 April "Bay of Pigs" fiasco)
Khrushchev put West Berlin on agenda
and is likey that Nixon (as a Poker Bluff) Demands Cuba in exchange

the Deutsche Demokratische Republik had other problems
large numbers of East Germans to flee to the West. by city Berlin.
First Secretary Walter Ulbricht wanted to stop that
and so they build the Wall around West Berlin and West border of D.D.R. in august 1961
on 25 October. US and USSR Troops standoff at Checkpoint Charlie.

I made TL were this led to World War III
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=75429

The Cuba Missile Crisis
offcurse there a "Bay of Pig" Fiasco here
of the Option against Cuba is likey that Nixon
take this option: heavy Bombarment follow by large US Invasion of Cuba

wat end up in Cuba Missle War Time Line
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=65071

is depents how Khrushchev reacts on Invasion on Cuba
and his Force in Cuba
because they had the Order "To Use there Nuclear Weapons in case of US Bombarment or Invasion"
will they be good looser and give up ?

even with luck Nixion and World survies Cuba Missle Crisis
there is still Vietnam

Note to Nixon illness during 1960

Nixon injured his knee on a dirty car door while campaigning in North Carolina
Nixon was in Hospital for two weeks, while the infected knee was injected with antibiotics.
and had to cease campaigning for two weeks, (that was a major campain disaster)
out of Hospital, he had to face the first TV debate in United States presidential election.
on the way to TV Studio, Nixon hit his knee again on a car door!

from this history Nixon had 2 things left
to lose the United States presidential election of 1960
and his adiction on painkiller (first his knee later, back problems)

Hm, I would have to say I agree with Nicomacheus over Michel Van.
Vans whole thing seems ridiculous and rather stupid sounding. If the Bay of Pigs goes well, without US troops, and the rest of the senerio Nicomachaeus lays out happens, we will have a very different USA.

The black may start going for the GOP especially if the democrats are forced to oppose civil rights and if they do support it, who does the south vote for?
No vietnam, we have huge cultural differences.
Very different world.

Constantinople said:

Hm, I would have to say I agree with Nicomacheus over Michel Van.
Vans whole thing seems ridiculous and rather stupid sounding. If the Bay of Pigs goes well, without US troops, and the rest of the senerio Nicomachaeus lays out happens, we will have a very different USA.

The black may start going for the GOP especially if the democrats are forced to oppose civil rights and if they do support it, who does the south vote for?
No vietnam, we have huge cultural differences.
Very different world.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I will say that I think Michel brings up some good points, particularly as regards the crises of the 1960s. It is my understanding that a significant reason for those crises was Kennedy himself. An untested, unkown force on the international stage either the Soviets wanted to test him or he felt he had to act more strictly and hence exacerbated the danger. Nixon on the other hand is a known force; I expect he might keep on some of Eisenhower's Foreign Policy staff, at least at the Cabinet level. Now the invasion of Cuba may still be tricky, but it may be managed (note the point about air power above).

In my opinion, the more ominous effect of an earlier Nixon presidency would be China: what happens if detente never leads to rapprochement? Does Deng Xiopeng still come to power and this happens without Nixon, contrary to the proverb? Does Deng come to power, but the US remains hostile (similar to the 40 year embargo of Castro's Cuba OTL)? If anything, I think WWIII has a better chance of breaking out TTL over China than a Soviet conflict gone hot. Also, if the press of the 1960s could shield Kennedy from all sorts of marital infedelity and drug use, the same mores might shielf Nixon, who was hugely popular until 1973/4 since his private personality (the cursing, slurs, temper) were unknown until the tapes became public.
Without his loss in 1960, Nixon may also be a bit less paranoid/angry than he was OTL.

Isn't there a theory that Nixon did win, but that the Democrats rigged the votes in a couple of states, to allow Kennedy to squeeze home?

Marius said:

Isn't there a theory that Nixon did win, but that the Democrats rigged the votes in a couple of states, to allow Kennedy to squeeze home?

Click to expand...

If by a couple of states you mean Texas and Illinois, because of Johnson having dead people vote and Joe Kennedy buying votes/Mayor Dally's normal antics, certainly.

Constantinople said:

Hm, I would have to say I agree with Nicomacheus over Michel Van.
Vans whole thing seems ridiculous and rather stupid sounding. If the Bay of Pigs goes well, without US troops, and the rest of the senerio Nicomachaeus lays out happens, we will have a very different USA.

Click to expand...

I accept the critic
detail to Pig of Bay aka Operation Puma.
after the Book i have read and Tv doku tell this story:

The original plan called for landing the exile Brigade 2506 in the vicinity of the old colonial city of Trinidad, Cuba, in the central province of Sancti Spiritus approximately 250 miles (400 km) southeast of Havana, at the foothills of the Escambray Mountains.

Click to expand...

so NOT Bay of Pigs

after the New York Times report over training Brigade 2506
(in same time Cuba was warn by K.G.B about a invasion summer 1961)
the C.I.A. chance the timetabel and changing the landing area to Bay of Pigs
the Plan:
air strikes on Cuba by B-26
from four 2,400-ton chartered transports Brigade 2506
they lands 1.500 on the Girón and Zapatos Larga beaches from a beachhead (like in D-day)
expand to inland and called by radio as "exil-Goverment" from Cuba the USA for Help

The small army hoped to find support from the local population, only to find Cuban army infantry battalions.

Major changes:

1) Cuba. If the Bay of Pigs landing is still mishandled then Nixon sends in the military. Castro killed, Cuba a typical Latin American state, if wealthier and happier with more freedoms.

2) Cuban Missle Crisis. Never happened. Possibly Kruschev stays on a few more years without that debacle, which he seized on as a way to get around the Soviets real missle gap pending development of proper Soviet ICBMS and against the advice of practically the entire Soviet leadership including the KGB and Foreign Ministry. Since he had more respect for Nixon this might mean less Soviet adventurism or even detente 1962.

3) Lyndon Johnson. Never becomes president, which is too bad since he got the blame for many JFK blunders while JFK got the credit for LBJ's many good works.

4) Vietnam. May never upgrade to the fighting level of OTL as Nixon refuses to assasinate an allied head of state in time of war. As a result the post-Diem chaos never erupts and US troop commitments come later and on a smaller scale, if at all. South Vietnam may survive it if holds out until the Sino-Soviet rupture in 1978.

5) Space program proceeds at the more sensible and less costly pace started under Eisenhower, with steady progress instead of costly adventures which rapidly left the public jaded(and queasy about the cost) while also suffering an obvious dead end once the moon landings were complete(Mars being decades away). Around 1970 a semi-permanent US space station goes up comparable to Freedom today in size. The first trip to the moon in 1972 is much easier and less expensive while the benefits of communications sats come a few years sooner(less cost, more benefit).

Almost forgot. Without LBJ Houston Control never exists.

Do remember, the Bay of Pigs took place before Cuba officially became a Communist state (in 1965). Until then it was very much in the same league as Nasser's Egypt (plus the added geographic benefit) in relation to the USSR.

If the US invaded alongside Operation Panther, the Soviets would most certainly have sat on their hands, however relations would have deteriorated far worse, and the Soviets might have sort to keep strong ties with China, to reinforce the Communist blocs power. Expect far more Red coups in the 1960s to compensate for the loss of Cuba.

Jape said:

Do remember, the Bay of Pigs took place before Cuba officially became a Communist state (in 1965). Until then it was very much in the same league as Nasser's Egypt (plus the added geographic benefit) in relation to the USSR.

If the US invaded alongside Operation Panther, the Soviets would most certainly have sat on their hands, however relations would have deteriorated far worse, and the Soviets might have sort to keep strong ties with China, to reinforce the Communist blocs power. Expect far more Red coups in the 1960s to compensate for the loss of Cuba.

Click to expand...

Well, we assume that Nixon wouldn't reverse Eisenhower's policy of treating Castro as if he already were communist, mostly IIRC in connection to the nationalization of American assets.

Also, as you say, Cuba isn't really a loss to the Communist bloc. Rather it legitmizes Soviet use of force in similar ways. Coup attempts may oocur, but I doubt the Soviets alone can counter China's drift into an independent policy. Granted, this doesn't mean they become more US friendly, either.

Nicomacheus said:

Also, as you say, Cuba isn't really a loss to the Communist bloc. Rather it legitmizes Soviet use of force in similar ways. .

Click to expand...

Remember the agreement of Yalta.
Cuba is in the Occidental sphere of influence.
The United States and the Nato
did not intervene in Hungaria in 1956,or in Czechoslovakia in 1968.
everyone is a master at his home.
Nixon would have been able to understand this to the Russians.