A Third Term For Eisenhower?

It is often agreed by Historians that if their was no 22nd amendment, then Dwight Eisenhower could have one a third term in 1960. FDR of course had been elected to four terms as president, so maybe he could have broken the idea that a President should only serve two terms.

Now, some people argue, the Eisenhower was neither healthy enough to run for a third term, or that he didin't want it. But the Rebuplicans might have convinced him.

So if he could have, would he have run for a third term?
How would he have faired in the debates against Kennedy?
Would Kennedy have even gotten the Nomination, if the Democrats knew what he would be up against?

And if he does win, how will his third term effect the rest of American History? (the Cuban Missle Crisis was just around the bend, as well as the Veitnam War and the Civil Right Movement)
 
How would he have faired in the debates against Kennedy?

Ike would not have debated Kennedy. The idea was that for sitting President to debate an opponent he lowered himself to the same level. Reagan violated this precept in 1984 against the wishes of most of his advisers mostly because he took his Great Communicator image way too seriously and set a precedent.
 
He'll win. There's no real doubt about that. Eisenhower made the American people happy—it was perhaps his defining characteristic.

Would Kennedy even go for the '60 nomination? That's a good question. As it was, Kennedy assembled probably the very best campaign organization put into the field up to that point, ran a generally brilliant primary[1] and general election campaign[2], and even then defeated Nixon's poor campaign very marginally.

Odds are Kennedy simply holds his fire. So. Stevenson, Humphrey, Johnson, perhaps Symington, and perhaps a couple others. None are going to win, though.


As for Nixon—Eisenhower long thought that Nixon would be better prepared for an election campaign if he had run something. He suggested, in '56, to Nixon that he should take whatever Cabinet position interested him (likely State, possibly Defense) and use that as a better springboard. Would Nixon, now eight years in the VP slot, take him on that if it was offered again?

Remember that the VP was not as it is now the assumed frontrunner and likely nominee of the party.

A third Eisenhower administration would focus on reform in government. Probably a new Cabinet level Chief of Staff type position, and other items. Otherwise things would be much the same as the second Eisenhower term.


1964 is very interesting. Rockefeller & Nixon (regardless of whether he keeps the VP position) are the clear Republican frontrunners.

Equally, Kennedy is the frontrunner on the Democratic side (depending on his health).

Should be fun, but Kennedy's probably got a major edge.


(Incidentally you've butterflied Reagan out of importance.)




[1] Although it should be noted that had Kennedy won all 10 of Wisconsin's congressional districts he would have had the nomination on the spot. Failing to do so meant he was forced to engage in a series of other primaries. Also notable is Humphrey—had he withdrawn following Wisconsin Kennedy would have been badly weakened for he would have had no one to beat as both Stevenson & Johnson were aimed at the convention.

[2] With the notable exception of California, badly run by Pat Brown (predicting an 800,000 Kennedy victory the night of the election it was clear he didn't understand his own state… although losing control of the California delegation at the convention had already shown that) and where regular and reform Democrats spent most of their time fighting each other instead of Nixon.
 
Top