1964 New York Senate Race

[PBrunsel]

NOTE:

You don't have to be from the great stae of New York to vote in this poll.

In 1964 Robert Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson hated each other so much Kennedy knew he would not be Attorney General again. He was denied being Vice President at the 1964 Democratic Convention, so Kennedy ran for Senate from New York. Incumbent Senator Kenneth Keating ran for reelection calling Kennedy a "Carpetbagger." "What can a fellow brought in from Massachusettess by a few party bosses know about the problems of New York?" Keating asked.

The Kennedy Campaign flooded the airwaves with commercials and keating was taken by surprise! Who would you vote for in this pivitol moment of the Kennedy Clan?

[JohnFKennedy]

Kennedy!

[PBrunsel]

I voted for Keating, not because he was a Republican, but because Kennedy was a Carpetbagger.

[KEmperor]

Keating.

[Platypus]

The greatest Kennedy.

People like him hould be allowed to cross borders.

[Gustaf]

THIS is why Masschausetts had a right to glow over the other states, they were after all the only state with THREE senators.

[© tweed]

Kennedy

[Kevinstat]

Can somebody tell me about the two candidates in what they stood for?  I know RFK was seen as one of the more leftist Democrats when he ran for President in 1968, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was fiscally quite Conservative.  If Keating was a Rockefeller Republican, he may well have been to the left of Kennedy on some issues.  I might have voted for Keating if I saw him as being more in touch with average New Yorkers, but President Kennedy's memory appeals to me despite his fiscal conservatism, and perhaps RFK would have appealed to me then.

[© tweed]

I don't know much about Keating

[Keystone Phil]

Keating.

Reasons:
1) RFK was an extreme liberal.
2) RFK was a carpetbagger. He wouldn't be nominated for President in '64, LBJ wouldn't pick him for VP, he wouldn't be reappointed for AG so he figured, Why not move to New York and run for Senate? That REALLY annoys me since he had nothing to do with the state and just decides to run for office there (much like a certain junior Senator from New York currently serving)

[CARLHAYDEN]

I would have voted for the Conservative Party nominee.  If memory serves me correctly his was a Professor at a small upstate liberal arts college.

Keating was to the left of Nelson Rockefeller and only slightly to the right of Jacob Javits.

Keating disparaged Barry Goldwater.

He was one of the reasons the Conservative Party grew so large and influential.

[Ben.]

Kennedy he would have been a great President... more pragmaitc than Teddy (not hard ) and tougher than Jack (Hard), the perfect Kennedy

 

I always though he was striking a kinda Lincoln esqu pose in this photo (?)

PS: I'll try to shrink the picture a bit

[dazzleman]

I hate to rain on the Kennedy parade, but I think Robert Kennedy would have been a poor president.

The record shows that by the late 1960s, Kennedy was strongly wedded to liberal ideas about the role of government that have proven in the years since to have been a miserable failure.

All the charisma in the world can't change that.  I agree that RFK was somewhat better than some of the other liberals who followed him, but that's not saying much.

[Ben.]

I hate to rain on the Kennedy parade, but I think Robert Kennedy would have been a poor president.

The record shows that by the late 1960s, Kennedy was strongly wedded to liberal ideas about the role of government that have proven in the years since to have been a miserable failure.

All the charisma in the world can't change that.  I agree that RFK was somewhat better than some of the other liberals who followed him, but that's not saying much.

I think you underestimate how a Robert Kennedy Administration could have dealt with the trials of the late 1970’s or early 1980’s. Unlike Teddy and like Jack he was a pragmatist and interested far more in what worked and what was practical than what might seem ideologically pure, sure he was in values very much like LBJ or Teddy but in his implementation of these I think you would have seen polices not dissimilar to the leftwing in Australia “monetarism with a human face” spending cuts and more progressive, yet far reaching tax cuts and a hawkish foreign policy.      

[Keystone Phil]

I'm guessing that was a photo of Kennedy while he was Attorney General. Ya know...when he was appointed by his brother before he ever tried a case in court.

[dazzleman]

I hate to rain on the Kennedy parade, but I think Robert Kennedy would have been a poor president.

The record shows that by the late 1960s, Kennedy was strongly wedded to liberal ideas about the role of government that have proven in the years since to have been a miserable failure.

All the charisma in the world can't change that.  I agree that RFK was somewhat better than some of the other liberals who followed him, but that's not saying much.

I think you underestimate how a Robert Kennedy Administration could have dealt with the trials of the late 1970’s or early 1980’s. Unlike Teddy and like Jack he was a pragmatist and interested far more in what worked and what was practical than what might seem ideologically pure, sure he was in values very much like LBJ or Teddy but in his implementation of these I think you would have seen polices not dissimilar to the leftwing in Australia “monetarism with a human face” spending cuts and more progressive, yet far reaching tax cuts and a hawkish foreign policy.      

You may be right, but we'll never know.  If Kennedy had lived and been elected in 1968, he would have left office in 1977 at the latest, so he wouldn't have been dealing in any case with the issues of the late 1970s and early 1980s.  He would surely have taken a different turn in Vietnam than Nixon, but no doubt with the same end result.  Maybe we would have avoided some of the partisan bitterness that grew out of Vietnam, but maybe his Vietnam policy, without engaging the Russians and Chinese as Nixon did, would have produced a disaster.

I agree with you to a point - he would not have been the dreadful doctrinaire liberal that his brother became.  But maybe he would have evolved in that direction.  There's no way of knowing.  That is the one benefit of dying young - nobody sees you age, and people can assume the best about how you would have aged and developed.

[JohnFKennedy]

I hate to rain on the Kennedy parade, but I think Robert Kennedy would have been a poor president.

The record shows that by the late 1960s, Kennedy was strongly wedded to liberal ideas about the role of government that have proven in the years since to have been a miserable failure.

All the charisma in the world can't change that.  I agree that RFK was somewhat better than some of the other liberals who followed him, but that's not saying much.

I think you underestimate how a Robert Kennedy Administration could have dealt with the trials of the late 1970’s or early 1980’s. Unlike Teddy and like Jack he was a pragmatist and interested far more in what worked and what was practical than what might seem ideologically pure, sure he was in values very much like LBJ or Teddy but in his implementation of these I think you would have seen polices not dissimilar to the leftwing in Australia “monetarism with a human face” spending cuts and more progressive, yet far reaching tax cuts and a hawkish foreign policy.      

You may be right, but we'll never know.  If Kennedy had lived and been elected in 1968, he would have left office in 1977 at the latest, so he wouldn't have been dealing in any case with the issues of the late 1970s and early 1980s.  He would surely have taken a different turn in Vietnam than Nixon, but no doubt with the same end result.  Maybe we would have avoided some of the partisan bitterness that grew out of Vietnam, but maybe his Vietnam policy, without engaging the Russians and Chinese as Nixon did, would have produced a disaster.

I agree with you to a point - he would not have been the dreadful doctrinaire liberal that his brother became.  But maybe he would have evolved in that direction.  There's no way of knowing.  That is the one benefit of dying young - nobody sees you age, and people can assume the best about how you would have aged and developed.

However, we wouldn't  have had Watergate with Robert F. Kennedy which would mean public trust in politicians would be a lot greater and there would be far greater turnouts.

Also, the Presidential Powers would have continued to increase.

[dazzleman]

Just to play Devil's Advocate, it may be better in the long run that trust in politicians is low.  When we have overly trusted politicians, as in the 1960s, the results have generally been a disaster.

And a continuing increase in presidential power is not necessarily a good thing either.

I don't think you can assume that a Kennedy administration would have been scandal-free.  Maybe, but there are no guarantees.  Watergate was very much along the lines of what previous presidents, particularly JFK and LBJ, had done, but it was the climate that tolerated those actions that changed, and made Watergate the scandal that it was.  

The greater partisan atmosphere in the wake of Vietnam made opposition parties search for scandals as a way to regain power in a way that they didn't before.  Nixon was not unique in his corruption.  So I don't think Kennedy would necessarily have been exempt from this mood change, though it may not have been as extreme if he had ended the Vietnam War sooner without a foreign policy disaster.

The fact remains that Kennedy was committed to the idea of fostering dependency on government as a way of fighting poverty, and showing forbearance toward criminals as a way of dealing with crime.  These twin liberal ideas from the 1960s have been a disaster, and unless Kennedy gave up on them quickly, his presidency would have been a disaster.

[Gustaf]

Just to play Devil's Advocate, it may be better in the long run that trust in politicians is low.  When we have overly trusted politicians, as in the 1960s, the results have generally been a disaster.

And a continuing increase in presidential power is not necessarily a good thing either.

I don't think you can assume that a Kennedy administration would have been scandal-free.  Maybe, but there are no guarantees.  Watergate was very much along the lines of what previous presidents, particularly JFK and LBJ, had done, but it was the climate that tolerated those actions that changed, and made Watergate the scandal that it was.  

The greater partisan atmosphere in the wake of Vietnam made opposition parties search for scandals as a way to regain power in a way that they didn't before.  Nixon was not unique in his corruption.  So I don't think Kennedy would necessarily have been exempt from this mood change, though it may not have been as extreme if he had ended the Vietnam War sooner without a foreign policy disaster.

The fact remains that Kennedy was committed to the idea of fostering dependency on government as a way of fighting poverty, and showing forbearance toward criminals as a way of dealing with crime.  These twin liberal ideas from the 1960s have been a disaster, and unless Kennedy gave up on them quickly, his presidency would have been a disaster.

I fully agree. Power cprrupts, etc...it's important to keep politicians in check. Talking about presidential elections, you should come down and vote in the fantasy presidential election that is on right now...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

What can I say? It's just the carpertbagger seat. It's been won in 1964, 1970, and 2000 by carpetbaggers. Monyihan had to keep that seat warm for 24 years while people searched up another carpetbagger.

[Nym90]

Kennedy.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

RFK

[DownWithTheLeft]

I would have voted JFK in 1960, but I wouldn't have voted for either one of these men.  I would have wrote in someone.  Also, he had no qualifications except he was the son of a bootlegger and brother of a president, not quite the regular Jeb Bush we're talking about

[© tweed]

I would have voted JFK in 1960, but I wouldn't have voted for either one of these men.  I would have wrote in someone.  Also, he had no qualifications except he was the son of a bootlegger and brother of a president, not quite the regular Jeb Bush we're talking about

RFK had served as Attorney General for more than three years at this point.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

As much as I like both of the candidates I would have voted for the Republican candidate Frank Keating. A good Republican in my mind No disrespect to Bobby, who was the greatest of the Kennedy Brothers.