WI Kennedy Loses in 1952?

One PoD is the Senate race b/w JFK and Henry Cabot Lodge Jr -- despite the latter busying himself campaigning for Ike out of state, the race was still close, less than 3%. So suppose Kennedy loses.

First, what becomes of the Kennedy clan -- does JFK run for congress again, or look to the governorship? What about Bobby -- suppose he can't get close to McCarthy*; where does his career go from here?

And of course, I'd be interested in the larger impact on American politics...

*full disclosure: I'm actually thinking about this being part of a bigger "No Mao" TL (discussed here), where one aspect is McCarthy's loss in 52 and the absence of McCarthyism generally -- no need for that to affect this thread though
 
If JFK loses that race, then his chance of becoming POTUS is gone. MA is too small a state for its governor to cut a national figure (unless they are already one, like Romney was in 2002 IOTL) and Saltonstall is even more of an immovable figure than HCL because he tended his constituency. JFK could try again in '54, when the Democratic Congressional takeover might boost him to a squeaker over Saltonstall. It isn't unusual: IOTL Thune fell short in '02 but won in '04, Ensign lost in '98 but won in '00.

Most likely is that Bobby moves back to NY and starts his own political career there. If there's an open House seat in NYC, then he'll take that and wait for the first Senate opening.
 
Most likely is that Bobby moves back to NY and starts his own political career there. If there's an open House seat in NYC, then he'll take that and wait for the first Senate opening.

As it happens, the seat representing the lower east side was open in 1954 -- and Keating was, OTL, elected in 1958 (and not by much). How's that for irony -- RFK beating Keating six years earlier than OTL?

As to John -- assuming he doesn't challenge Saltonstall in 56, does this mean he's out of politics? Could he still run for his old seat at least?
 
As it happens, the seat representing the lower east side was open in 1954 -- and Keating was, OTL, elected in 1958 (and not by much). How's that for irony -- RFK beating Keating six years earlier than OTL?

As to John -- assuming he doesn't challenge Saltonstall in 56, does this mean he's out of politics? Could he still run for his old seat at least?

Marcantonio's district, amirite? Then in the Dem tidal wave of '58, he can most likely beat Keating unless Rocky's coattails can slow the wave enough to pull off a Keating squeaker.

Saltonstall is up in '54, not '56. He could run for his old seat but wouldn't stay in the House for long if national office proved to be out of reach.
 
Marcantonio's district, amirite?... [JFK] could run for his old seat but wouldn't stay in the House for long if national office proved to be out of reach.

I was thinking of Louis Heller's (resigned 54) -- at least I think the 8th was the lower east side back then.

So how long would John stay in the House (assuming he runs in 54) what would he do after he left? And, for kicks, what are Ted's prospects after passing the bar in 59?
 
I don't think John would run in '54. The reason Senators make bad Presidents is that any Senator with experience is usually much older than a presidential candidate. Senators who became POTUS just used the office as a stepping stone and so have no idea how to really work with Congress.
 
Top