Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(CNN)If just a few thousand votes in a few key states had gone the other way that day, you could argue that Cuba might now be our 51st state.
The world might never have heard the names Neil Armstrong or Watergate.
It was Election Day: November 8, 1960. Two Americans who would later become legends — Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat John F. Kennedy — faced off in one of the closest presidential elections in U.S. history.
(CNN)If just a few thousand votes in a few key states had gone the other way that day, you could argue that Cuba might now be our 51st state.
The world might never have heard the names Neil Armstrong or Watergate.
It was Election Day: November 8, 1960. Two Americans who would later become legends — Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat John F. Kennedy — faced off in one of the closest presidential elections in U.S. history.
HAH! Dream on! A war with Russia would have been disasterous! What idiot came up with the Cuba as 51st State theory?! The US wouldn't have even WANTED Cuba as a state or protectorate.
Kennedy was a horrible president really. Tripled military spending, bay of pigs and Vietnam come to mind. Talk about a disaster. Now the president before him, Eisenhower was a GREAT president. The last great president our country has seen. Ah well. Seems have been going down hill over the past few decades.
Maybe Nixon would be less bitter. Maybe no "war on drugs" as we know it, no corn subisidies, no oil crises, etc.
What's interesting to me is the parallels between 1960 and 2000. Both were elections in times when the economy was booming, the results were very close, the candidates didn't seem so different at the time but later turned out to be very different, the way the candidates came off on tv made a huge difference, etc.
Last edited by redguitar77111; 03-24-2018 at 12:42 AM..
Kennedy was a horrible president really. Tripled military spending, bay of pigs and Vietnam come to mind. Talk about a disaster. Now the president before him, Eisenhower was a GREAT president. The last great president our country has seen. Ah well. Seems have been going down hill over the past few decades.
The CIA brought the preliminary plans behind the Bay of Pigs to President Eisenhower in early 1960. He green-lighted the project. By summer the plans were more fully developed and President Eisenhower bankrolled their implementation to the tune of $13 million. After the election, the Eisenhower administration continued to plan the invasion, bringing the President-elect into the loop. While Kennedy fully deserves criticism for the fiasco, your example of the Bay of Pigs as demonstrating how 'horrible' the Kennedy administration was while simultaneously idealizing the President who oversaw the develop of the plan with the full intent that it would be executed, is completely nonsensical.
At any rate, the subject of this thread is essentially WHAT IF NIXON HAD WON?. If you think that alt-Nixon administration wouldn't have backed the plan (and probably with the active military support that Kennedy withheld), then you've got another think coming.
Also, the Vietnam War was Johnson's baby. Period. To blame LBJ's massive escalation on Kennedy is only slightly less absurd than blaming it on Eisenhower (who was President when the first U.S. 'advisors' joined the fray).
While I agree that Eisenhower was a better President than Kennedy, your cited rationale for admiring one while denigrating the other makes absolutely zero sense in light of ... well, actual reality.
The CIA brought the preliminary plans behind the Bay of Pigs to President Eisenhower in early 1960. He green-lighted the project. By summer the plans were more fully developed and President Eisenhower bankrolled their implementation to the tune of $13 million. After the election, the Eisenhower administration continued to plan the invasion, bringing the President-elect into the loop. While Kennedy fully deserves criticism for the fiasco, your example of the Bay of Pigs as demonstrating how 'horrible' the Kennedy administration was while simultaneously idealizing the President who oversaw the develop of the plan with the full intent that it would be executed, is completely nonsensical.
At any rate, the subject of this thread is essentially WHAT IF NIXON HAD WON?. If you think that alt-Nixon administration wouldn't have backed the plan (and probably with the active military support that Kennedy withheld), then you've got another think coming.
Also, the Vietnam War was Johnson's baby. Period. To blame LBJ's massive escalation on Kennedy is only slightly less absurd than blaming it on Eisenhower (who was President when the first U.S. 'advisors' joined the fray).
While I agree that Eisenhower was a better President than Kennedy, your cited rationale for admiring one while denigrating the other makes absolutely zero sense in light of ... well, actual reality.
Robert McNamara was responsible for America's Viet Nam war strategy until he got cold feet and quit. He was JFK's Defense Secretary. He was an advocate of blockading Cuba in the Missile Crisis and the most important foreign policy person in JFK's administration. Partially because JFK had very little knowledge of foreign policy or foreign countries generally.
American involvement in Viet Nam had increased significantly under JFK and, run by McNamara, was going to increase a lot more no matter who was President.
As he showed in the Berlin Wall crisis, JFK was in over his head with foreign policy. The ship was basically rudderless. Nixon had handled Kruschev in their 1960 debate and would not have fallen into the same traps as JFK. Except for the Bay of Pigs.
The moon landings have turned into a dead end. Manned missions to extra-terrestial bodies have been pie in the sky stuff for years. The Space Shuttle and various space stations have been the preferred approach for 30 years. If we had started down that road in 1961 our space exploration effort would be 10 years ahead of where it is now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
