No 22nd Amendment: Does Ike run in 1960?

Exactly what it says on the tin. The 22nd Amendment fails to ratify in 1950. I don't think butterflies block Eisenhower in 1952. But let's assume that they don't for the sake of argument. His Presidency is almost exactly the same. Without term limits does Eisenhower decide to seek a third term?

My guess is no. Mainly because of health concerns. If he runs he wins-period. Kennedy doesn't stand anymore chance against the General than Adlai Stevenson does. Indeed, if I remember correctly Nixon had a late period surge of support when Ike spoke out more in his favor. If he runs what happens to Nixon, does he stay on the ticket? From what I remember Ike wanted to drop him in 1956, and Nixon would probably be frustrated by the President's decision to run again.

Thoughts?
 
I think Eisenhower was ready to retire in 1960. He had just turned 70, presided over a decade of peace and prosperity, and had no major outstanding projects that would have required his lasting attention.

Still, though, without the 22nd Amendment, there could have been a gap of ambiguity, during which a Nixon-Eisenhower split removes some his strength, leading to a Kennedy win outside the margin of error (or however you want to define the 1960 election in OTL).
 
I think Eisenhower was ready to retire in 1960. He had just turned 70, presided over a decade of peace and prosperity, and had no major outstanding projects that would have required his lasting attention.

Still, though, without the 22nd Amendment, there could have been a gap of ambiguity, during which a Nixon-Eisenhower split removes some his strength, leading to a Kennedy win outside the margin of error (or however you want to define the 1960 election in OTL).

What about the military-industrial complex? I seem to remember Ike thinking negatively of that little business arrangment. Maybe Ike has the gravitas and credit to the Pentagon straightened out? Then again Ike was kind of a relaxed caretaker more than a real fire and brimestone reformer. (yes, I know that is generalization).
 
Too old. If he did run again(though he wouldn't), I wouldn't be half surprised if he suffered a heart attack from the stress of the Cuban Missile Crisis(or a comparable crisis)-as he died in 1969 of heart attack, in our history.

Thinking through the presidents(assuming Eisenhower and Reagan would have refrained from a third term due to their age) I think Clinton was the only one denied a third term because of the 22nd amendment.
 
If there's anyone least likely to run for a third term without the 22nd amendment, Eisenhower is surely that person.
 
I do not believe that Eisenhower would have run for a third term do to health problems. However, he wouldn't have suffered a heart attack because of the Cuban Missile Crisis because there would not have been one. The President had supported to move to overthrow Castro and unlike Kennedy he would hot have hesitated to send in US forces to tip the balance in favor of the Cuban exiles. As to what would happen to Vice President Nixon I do not know There is always the question as to who would have replaced him. Nixon might have returned to California and run for Governor in 1962 and thus be well prpared to run for the White house in 1964.
 
First things first: Ike would have been nearly 70 at the time of the 1960 election, and had had serious health problems during his tenure. I strongly suspect he'd have retired voluntarily, urged to do so by his doctor(s) and family. Thus, it's difficult to imagine that the setup for the 1960 election would have been significantly different than it was IOTL.

About the only effect I can see would have been some "will he or won't he" uncertainty that would have kept the Democrats guessing, and have guided them toward a candidate geared to beat Ike, rather than Nixon. Perhaps that might have led to Lyndon Johnson getting the nod, but the primary reason for that would have been Johnson's experience as something of a counterweight to Ike's executive experience. Then, presuming Ike commits to retiring at the last moment, the Democrats' candidate is running against the wrong guy.

How would Nixon have fared against Johnson? I don't think the debates would have been perceived to tilt to the Democrats, and for a very superficial reason: Nixon's speech was standard/plain vanilla American, while Johnson had an undeniable Texas accent. The latter would have turned off northeastern voters, who would have equated that accent with Johnson being a rube or a snake oil salesman. Bottom line: Nixon wins.
 
Johnson would be horrible on TV- he came of age in the radio/newspaper era and never adapted to TV. Nixon would win easily. Nixon would not run for Governor to run for President, in fact he says in his memoirs that he ran precisely in order to avoid being drafted for a harakiri rematch against Jack in '64.
 
Well, If I recall correctly, Ike didn't care much for Kennedy, so I can see him running if he thinks Kennedy could end up as President. On the other hand, I'm not sure if JFK would want to risk his Presidential hopes on going up against Ike, since he would probably lose.
 
I would think not. One has to remember the whole near-sacred level of respect the American's had for the two term limit; Aside from FDR (and perhaps Teddy too), no one had even run for a third term, let alone actually won. There is also a reason why the 22nd admendment was passed as fast as it was; Almost everyone wanted to make sure nobody ever ran three times again.
 
I would think not. One has to remember the whole near-sacred level of respect the American's had for the two term limit; Aside from FDR (and perhaps Teddy too), no one had even run for a third term, let alone actually won. There is also a reason why the 22nd admendment was passed as fast as it was; Almost everyone wanted to make sure nobody ever ran three times again.

COuldn't that have changed with FDR setting the new precendent?
 
The 22nd was passed because the GOP wanted to exact posthumous revenge on FDR for deservedly curbstomping them 4 times. Besides, no president was in a place to do that except TR- had he done that in 1908, 1912 and 1916 there would be no 22nd today because it would've become the norm rather than the exception. Back OT: Ike would not run because of health reasons and because Mamie and his doctors would not allow it.
 
I do not believe that Eisenhower would have run for a third term do to health problems. However, he wouldn't have suffered a heart attack because of the Cuban Missile Crisis because there would not have been one. The President had supported to move to overthrow Castro and unlike Kennedy he would hot have hesitated to send in US forces to tip the balance in favor of the Cuban exiles. As to what would happen to Vice President Nixon I do not know There is always the question as to who would have replaced him. Nixon might have returned to California and run for Governor in 1962 and thus be well prpared to run for the White house in 1964.
The Crisis happened because "Bay of Pigs" was a dumb plan, period. It relied on too much Cold Warrior bravado. The point was that exiles would be secretly landed, meet up with Cuban anti-Castro forces already in Cuba (at least if I remember correctly), rile up Cuban public support against Castro, and overthrow Castro, and then "request" the US to come in and support the new government. The whole issue was that it was supposed to be covert, and hide the US's overt role. That's why the Marines and air support were canceled; because it endangered the possibility of the US hiding its role in the matter. And I still don't think it was destined to work because it relied on the exiles and rebels. The US could offer support, but the rebels failed to find the anti-Castro support that was needed, and were quickly dispatched as a result.
The US could win an outright invasion (that is to say, dispatch the standing armed forces of Cuba; insurgencies and rebels during occupation is another matter), and maybe nation build successfully after one, but that's not what BoP was.

That being said, a Missile Crisis is subject to various butterflies, although some form of Cuban backlash against the US in the wake of a failed coup against Castro is probable.

The 22nd was passed because the GOP wanted to exact posthumous revenge on FDR for deservedly curbstomping them 4 times.
That, and fear that the 20th century would be dominated by New Deal Democrats winning multiple terms in the White House with the GOP as the minority party.
 
Last edited:

The Dude

Banned
I would think not. One has to remember the whole near-sacred level of respect the American's had for the two term limit; Aside from FDR (and perhaps Teddy too), no one had even run for a third term, let alone actually won. There is also a reason why the 22nd admendment was passed as fast as it was; Almost everyone wanted to make sure nobody ever ran three times again.
Actually, IIRC, I thought it was passed by the Republicans, so that the new deal coalition wouldn't dominate politics forever.
 
Of course it was passed by the GOP, who controlled both houses of Congress. But even with the 22nd, the Dems were in power during the 1960s. They only occupied the WH in the 1950s because Ike was a bipartisan deity, not because they had won any ideological battles. Nor is the Republicanism of Bob Taft, especially on foreign policy, one would want winning those unending ideological wars.
 
22nd Amendment Supporters

Ike was known to support the 22nd amendment. There for I doubt he wanted to run again. In his book At Ease: Storys I Tell My Frends, Ike says he mad two bad choices as president. Earl Warren for Cheif Justice of the Supream court because he was too liberal and Dick Nixon for Vice President because he was too conservative.
 
The other choice for CJOTUS was John Davis, Marshall's opponent in Brown. I think we should all be quite grateful that Warren was chosen. From Ike's perspective, Warren was chosen because that was an explicit quid pro quo made at the 1952 RNC by Ike.
 
Top