Challenge: JFK Wins 1960 With a Clear Majority

1960 was one of the closest elections in American history. Victory hinged on states which could have gone either way between the incumbent vice president Richard Nixon, of the popular Eisenhower administration, and the popular and handsome Senator from Massachusetts, John F. Kennedy. In the end, Kennedy barely won and Nixon barely lost.

The challenge here is to have Kennedy not win on election day with a clear majority. That is to say, not winning by a blowout necessarily, but at the same time winning without it being a close election.
 
If JFK wins California, Alaska and Washington (the three closest states that went to Nixon) + gets the 14 EVs that Harry Byrd stole from him, his EV total would be 361 against Nixon's 175 (+1 EV from Harry Byrd), a respectable result, to be sure.
 
If JFK wins California, Alaska and Washington (the three closest states that went to Nixon) + gets the 14 EVs that Harry Byrd stole from him, his EV total would be 361 against Nixon's 175 (+1 EV from Harry Byrd), a respectable result, to be sure.

That would be a clear electoral majority, but as it stood, Kennedy won 303 electoral votes to Nixon's 219, which is certainly far above the 269 needed to have won in 1960. The popular vote must factor into this as well.
 
I should note I know full well the difficulty of this, given that Kennedy seemed to have had to climb up to victory in a way Nixon didn't, at least by the consensus of AH.com. So maybe the key lies in making Nixon mess up with a gaffe or tactical error which undermines his campaign in a way it wasn't in the OTL.
 
Well, taking a look at the historical polls, I think it's possible without too much changing. JFK was leading by 4% in the Gallup polls in late October (after the fourth and last debate, which was Oct. 21), and then gradually lost ground over the next two weeks, falling to 1% ahead by Nov 6th. So all that would have to happen is for JFK to have a better two weeks than OTL and hang onto that lead.
 
I'm with SA here: JFK sat on his lead like many a later frontrunner, Nixon among them, and nearly blew it. Nixon's final rally started too late and Boston caught themselves just in time. Have Boston catch themselves earlier and Ike not ramp up his schedule... mission accomplished.
 
A (generous) 4 pt. JFK swing. I gave him that nationwide, even in the South where LBJ was the primary campaigner.

JFK4Pts.png

JFK4Pts.png
 
Wow. That's much bigger than I had thought.

Now here's a critical question - effects on Congress?

The GOP might still make some gains in the House as a small correction to the '58 landslide but nothing important. There will still be legislative deadlock on domestic issues.
 
The GOP might still make some gains in the House as a small correction to the '58 landslide but nothing important. There will still be legislative deadlock on domestic issues.

I don't know; the GOP's 22 seat pickup happened with a 1% swing in their direction; if Kennedy does 4% better than OTL, that could easily be enough to cancel the swing.
 
I don't know; the GOP's 22 seat pickup happened with a 1% swing in their direction; if Kennedy does 4% better than OTL, that could easily be enough to cancel the swing.

Still doesn't cancel gridlock because there is still the Dixiecrat faction which is going to hate anything domestic, although they may be more muted with more Democratic voices.

Does JFK sweep in '60 lead to him overplaying his mandate, meaning earlier southern split to the GOP?
 
Still doesn't cancel gridlock because there is still the Dixiecrat faction which is going to hate anything domestic, although they may be more muted with more Democratic voices.

Does JFK sweep in '60 lead to him overplaying his mandate, meaning earlier southern split to the GOP?
JFK was one of the worst Presidents with Congress. I don't see much changing there.
 
Top