|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 09, 2020, 04:20:28 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: Torie, ON Progressive)
  Who was the rightful winner of the 1960 election?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Poll
Question: Who was the rightful winner of the 1960 election?
#1
Kennedy
 
#2
Nixon
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 43

Author Topic: Who was the rightful winner of the 1960 election?  (Read 3036 times)
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 18, 2005, 11:32:09 pm »

Sprung up from the Mitty thread about the football game.
Logged
Speed of Sound
LiberalPA
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,177
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2005, 11:40:22 pm »

I get first vote! Kiki Kennedy
Logged
WI_Dem
Rookie
**
Posts: 53


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2005, 11:41:03 pm »

I believe Kennedy won the election, but not IL.
Logged
jimrtex
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,477
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2005, 04:43:45 am »

Nixon won the popular vote.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,239
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2005, 02:11:47 pm »

Nixon arguably won the popular vote. (What's the popular vote worth though when a large proportion of the population is prevented from voting, at least de facto on account of race?)
The Democrats won the presidential election, even if - as is unlikely but distinctly possible - Texas or Illinois was stolen. The Southern Ind. Democrats were Democrats too.
Logged
jimrtex
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,477
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2005, 02:29:03 am »

Nixon arguably won the popular vote. (What's the popular vote worth though when a large proportion of the population is prevented from voting, at least de facto on account of race?)
The Democrats won the presidential election, even if - as is unlikely but distinctly possible - Texas or Illinois was stolen. The Southern Ind. Democrats were Democrats too.
The question was who was the rightful winner of the election.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,808
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2005, 02:30:43 am »

Who cares about the popular vote? Kennedy.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,239
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 20, 2005, 06:18:19 am »

Nixon arguably won the popular vote. (What's the popular vote worth though when a large proportion of the population is prevented from voting, at least de facto on account of race?)
The Democrats won the presidential election, even if - as is unlikely but distinctly possible - Texas or Illinois was stolen. The Southern Ind. Democrats were Democrats too.
The question was who was the rightful winner of the election.
So you're saying that whoever won the popular vote is the rightful winner of the election?
Just checking if I got you correctly.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,318
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 20, 2005, 05:33:39 pm »

This election is often portrayed as if it came down to a margin of approximately 9,000 in IL (BTW, I've heard there was substantial fraud downstate in favor of Nixon!). This is just not the case, even winning Illinois Nixon needs another large state to come out on top. Texas is often the state mentioned although the margin of 46,000 looks almost too solid to be swung in the other direction in the absence of fraud.  The only outright fraud in the 1960 election was Hawai'i. Nixon's electors had been certified, had voted, and had sent the results to Washington when the Democrats decided that Kennedy had actually won and sent surrogate results to Washington. Under pressure from Hawai'i's 2 Democratic senators, Nixon counted the certificate for Kennedy during the electoral vote count. In Bush v. Gore one of the liberals cited this in their opinion as an example of how the deadline for seating electors doesn't matter.
Logged
zorkpolitics
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,185
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 20, 2005, 09:20:19 pm »

Kennedy would have won in the House if the votes had been fairly counted.  Kennedy obviously won by fraud, Daley had no problem generating the +4000 votes Kennedy won by.  But Kennedy also won MO by only 4000, and MO has a long and distinguished history (all the way up until at least 2000) of voting the Democratic dead and ghosts of St. Louis.  If only real votes had been counted the result would likely have been Kennedy 263, Nixon 259 and Byrd 15 sending the election into the House where Kennedy would likely have won (Democrats held a 262-175 edge).
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,239
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2005, 11:19:32 am »

There wouldn't even have been any Byrd electors in that case. They were Democrats after all.

Hawai'i wasn't a case of fraud. The certificate was factually incorrect - tallying up all the precinct figures it was based on gives a narrow Dem win.
Logged
skybridge
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,919
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 26, 2005, 03:13:56 pm »

Kennedy, of course. Who are you to accuse Nixon's opponent of fraud Wink
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,509


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2005, 02:50:37 pm »

Nixon...I wouldn't be surprised if New Jersey was stolen either.


But anyways...would make an interesting alternate history thread...(Nixon and the Bay of Pigs, Nixon and the Cuban Missile Crisis...etc)
Logged
ATFFL
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,756
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 24, 2005, 02:58:37 pm »

Nixon...I wouldn't be surprised if New Jersey was stolen either.


But anyways...would make an interesting alternate history thread...(Nixon and the Bay of Pigs, Nixon and the Cuban Missile Crisis...etc)

There is no Cuban missile crisis as Nixon properly supports the bay of Pigs and it overthrows Castro.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,990


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 25, 2005, 02:00:18 pm »

Kennedy would have won in the House if the votes had been fairly counted. Kennedy obviously won by fraud, Daley had no problem generating the +4000 votes Kennedy won by. But Kennedy also won MO by only 4000, and MO has a long and distinguished history (all the way up until at least 2000) of voting the Democratic dead and ghosts of St. Louis. If only real votes had been counted the result would likely have been Kennedy 263, Nixon 259 and Byrd 15 sending the election into the House where Kennedy would likely have won (Democrats held a 262-175 edge).

The House doesn't vote like that in case of no Electoral College winner. Each state gets one vote in the House.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines