Nixon in 1960

[brucejoel99]

I think we'd see a successful Bay of Pigs (which would've obviously led to there having been no Cuban Missile Crisis), or something similar to it (perhaps just a straight up invasion w/ the U.S. Army, which would've likely been successful as the American public would've been very supportive of taking out Castro). Nixon was well aware of Eisenhower-initiated American plans to depose Castro, & he would've also lacked the indecisiveness that JFK had in his early days in office. W/ Castro out, either Batista is reinstalled or somebody less brutal than him is installed; either way, the new Cuban leader would've been a supporter of U.S. interests.

Vietnam is an interesting issue. Part of me strongly feels that Nixon wouldn't really escalate Vietnam like JFK & LBJ did as, while he was an ardent anti-Communist, he was also an expert in international affairs. I think he'd basically maintain Eisenhower's policy, sticking to advisers while focusing on other areas he'd consider more important.

I think we'd still see the passage of a Civil Rights Bill. Nixon was a firm believer in civil rights (before he appealed to racists via the Southern Strategy out of pure political gamesmanship), & even campaigned on it. He had originally received the endorsement of MLK Sr. before RFK reached out to MLK Jr. & other civil rights leaders. Nixon, then having a base that didn't include the south, would've had fewer qualms of pursuing civil rights legislation earlier & maybe even more aggressively (perhaps to secure the African-American vote), though it could possibly have taken longer then it did in real life to secure the legislation's passage as, without having JFK martyred, it could've been harder to push it through Congress.

There'd likely be no Berlin Crisis, or at least a very different one from the one we saw. Khrushchev had previous interaction w/ Nixon, & wouldn't have been as bold in trying to push Nixon's limits.

[brucejoel99]

I think we'd see a successful Bay of Pigs (which would've obviously led to there having been no Cuban Missile Crisis), or something similar to it (perhaps just a straight up invasion w/ the U.S. Army, which would've likely been successful as the American public would've been very supportive of taking out Castro). Nixon was well aware of Eisenhower-initiated American plans to depose Castro, & he would've also lacked the indecisiveness that JFK had in his early days in office. W/ Castro out, either Batista is reinstalled or somebody less brutal than him is installed; either way, the new Cuban leader would've been a supporter of U.S. interests.

Vietnam is an interesting issue. Part of me strongly feels that Nixon wouldn't really escalate Vietnam like JFK & LBJ did as, while he was an ardent anti-Communist, he was also an expert in international affairs. I think he'd basically maintain Eisenhower's policy, sticking to advisers while focusing on other areas he'd consider more important.

I think we'd still see the passage of a Civil Rights Bill. Nixon was a firm believer in civil rights (before he appealed to racists via the Southern Strategy out of pure political gamesmanship), & even campaigned on it. He had originally received the endorsement of MLK Sr. before RFK reached out to MLK Jr. & other civil rights leaders. Nixon, then having a base that didn't include the south, would've had fewer qualms of pursuing civil rights legislation earlier & maybe even more aggressively (perhaps to secure the African-American vote), though it could possibly have taken longer then it did in real life to secure the legislation's passage as, without having JFK martyred, it could've been harder to push it through Congress.

There'd likely be no Berlin Crisis, or at least a very different one from the one we saw. Khrushchev had previous interaction w/ Nixon, & wouldn't have been as bold in trying to push Nixon's limits.

So Nixon obviously wins re-election in 1964.

Probably, yeah.

[brucejoel99]

I think we'd see a successful Bay of Pigs (which would've obviously led to there having been no Cuban Missile Crisis), or something similar to it (perhaps just a straight up invasion w/ the U.S. Army, which would've likely been successful as the American public would've been very supportive of taking out Castro). Nixon was well aware of Eisenhower-initiated American plans to depose Castro, & he would've also lacked the indecisiveness that JFK had in his early days in office. W/ Castro out, either Batista is reinstalled or somebody less brutal than him is installed; either way, the new Cuban leader would've been a supporter of U.S. interests.

Vietnam is an interesting issue. Part of me strongly feels that Nixon wouldn't really escalate Vietnam like JFK & LBJ did as, while he was an ardent anti-Communist, he was also an expert in international affairs. I think he'd basically maintain Eisenhower's policy, sticking to advisers while focusing on other areas he'd consider more important.

I think we'd still see the passage of a Civil Rights Bill. Nixon was a firm believer in civil rights (before he appealed to racists via the Southern Strategy out of pure political gamesmanship), & even campaigned on it. He had originally received the endorsement of MLK Sr. before RFK reached out to MLK Jr. & other civil rights leaders. Nixon, then having a base that didn't include the south, would've had fewer qualms of pursuing civil rights legislation earlier & maybe even more aggressively (perhaps to secure the African-American vote), though it could possibly have taken longer then it did in real life to secure the legislation's passage as, without having JFK martyred, it could've been harder to push it through Congress.

There'd likely be no Berlin Crisis, or at least a very different one from the one we saw. Khrushchev had previous interaction w/ Nixon, & wouldn't have been as bold in trying to push Nixon's limits.

So Nixon obviously wins re-election in 1964.

Probably, yeah.

Against which Democrat according to you?

Idk, it'd depend on the path the party chooses to take after JFK's 1960 loss. Possibly JFK again (a-la Stevenson in the '50s) or LBJ, but really, who knows? Regardless, w/ the record above, he'd still probably beat anybody, though.