RJGFox wrote:
Perhaps Nixon beats him in 60, or Johnson somehow wins at the Convention, or he meets an assassins bullet sooner - what if Kennedy never has the opportunity to propose landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth. How does the US space programme develop? Just how critical is Kennedy?
Sputnik and US leadership's lack-of-response, (especially Ike's attempts to 'down-play' the significance) were among the 'pressures' that drove Kennedy to propose the lunar landing as a goal. He did not WANT to propose such and was well aware of the costs that would ensue but could find no other 'credible' alternative course.
(Despite how much folks here "dislike" McNamara as SoD he argued vehemently that going to the Moon wasn't a big enough goal although he 'only' proposed going to Mars or Venus instead)
Nixon might have had enough political 'clout' left over from Ike to not be pushed into a major decision but as Johnson would be back in charge of the senate after the election, (and possibly out for blood) this isn't a given as he wanted major spending directed to the South as has been noted.
Consider that Nixon may have by this same point already been deeply mired in a Cuban war, (he was at least aware of the Cuban invasion plans and some sources say he was deeply involved, the main question is if he would have still approved when the planning changed to the Bay of Pigs which was much less viable point of attack without direct US involvement*) and a possible intervention in Laos which would preclude a deep US space program.
While Nixon wasn't a 'space cadet' (neither was JFK) he was very interested in "technology" in general (again as was JFK) and admired the astronauts for their courage and as an example of the American 'spirit' of exploration. Unless Nixon decides to directly support the BoP's landings with US military intervention, (or cancels it, see * below) it is going to fail and if he does then the US is going to be directly involved with an invasion and war in Cuba as well as other commitments around the globe. All of which will directly affect any space program of the time.
In all the actually 'pressures' that resulted in Kennedy's "Lunar" program are still going to be there no matter who's President and as an heir to the previous "Administration" (which as has been pointed out will be 'blamed' for the Soviet lead in space) he will be under greater pressure to "do something" about it.
Randy
Differences here would include the ability to credibly discount the "missile gap" that Kennedy ran on, (which I have always felt was ironic given Ike and Nixon had run their initial campaign against Truman on a similarly non-existent "bomber gap" and this was somewhat karmic payback

) along with the ability to point to on-going development of similar lift-capability by the US, (Saturn-1) to that of the Soviets and planned development of the 3 man Apollo spacecraft for example.
Unfortunately it's not that much to argue with given the 'obvious' (to the public and a 'panicking' leadership' which no doubt a losing Kennedy and Johnson will pander to) Soviet 'leadership' in space. And the circumstances are still going to be basically the same in that the other options available such as Lunar flyby or a Space Station are at this point possibly 'easier' for the Soviets than the Americans.
Kennedy's decision to go to the Moon in perspective was quite justifiable simply because it would be a similar "starting point" for both the US and the USSR at that time. Should the US announce any 'lesser' goal, (such as the Lunar Flyby or a space station) the USSR could use what capability it already had available to subvert that goal for themselves. (A "bare-bones" Lunar flyby or a couple of modules docked together would suffice to be a credible 'first' by this point in the public mind) It is still very likely that Nixon would also 'chose' to go to the Moon as the most "logical" of the possible goals.
Fasquadron has it right in that the 'key' element was Kennedy getting shot that precluded any reduction in the overall goal and/or timetable. Kennedy was in fact having doubts over the viability of the stated goal and timetable. I think the timetable, ("before this decade is out") was the major area of doubt not specifically technology but the amount of money and resources it would require had by then begun to register and for Kennedy there were very few options for ways to 'back out' of that statement after the fact.