1960 if Clifford Case was Nixon’s running mate

[darklordoftech]

What effects would this have on the map?

[connally68]

Nixon scoops up New Jersey and Illinois and wins the electoral college; however, the Kennedy Johnson ticket does better in Texas.

[morgankingsley]

who are they lol

[Huey Long is a Republican]

who are they lol

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_P._Case

[darklordoftech]

Nixon scoops up New Jersey and Illinois and wins the electoral college; however, the Kennedy Johnson ticket does better in Texas.

Why would Texas prefer Lodge over Case?

[connally68]

Case was much more progressive on Civil Rights  to begin with, and very dovish on Vietnam by the late 60s.

[connally68]

Lodge was more acceptable in the south because he was much more hawkish.

[mianfei]

Case was much more progressive on Civil Rights  to begin with, and very dovish on Vietnam by the late 60s.

I’d think that if Case was very dovish it might have lost Nixon states – including electoral-vote-rich ones – which he actually won by relatively small margins, for example Florida and perhaps California and Alaska. Then, would Minnesota, Michigan and West Virginia, which Kennedy won by relatively small margins, have not supported a dovish candidate very strongly?

This map – based on what has been said – would give Kennedy a win with 272 to 257 electoral votes, or leave him with 266 if Alabama was split as observed:

[johnpressman]

Never thought of Case as Nixon's VP in 1960.  Nixon asked Rockefeller to be his VP and Rocky was as liberal as Case.  Nixon probably believed that Case didn't have the charisma of a Rocky and the 45 Electoral votes of New York (as opposed to NJ's 16) was a big enough prize to risk losing some Southern states to JFK and LBJ.

I believe that Nixon's best VP choice in 1960 was Everett Dirksen. Ev was a terrific campaigner, could bring in Illinois' 27 Electoral College votes and could concentrate his campaign in the Midwest with an eye to winning Michigan 20 votes, Minnesota 11 votes and Missouri 13 votes for the GOP and the Presidency.

[Kingpoleon]

I mean, I can’t see a lot changing.

Never thought of Case as Nixon's VP in 1960.  Nixon asked Rockefeller to be his VP and Rocky was as liberal as Case.  Nixon probably believed that Case didn't have the charisma of a Rocky and the 45 Electoral votes of New York (as opposed to NJ's 16) was a big enough prize to risk losing some Southern states to JFK and LBJ.

I believe that Nixon's best VP choice in 1960 was Everett Dirksen. Ev was a terrific campaigner, could bring in Illinois' 27 Electoral College votes and could concentrate his campaign in the Midwest with an eye to winning Michigan 20 votes, Minnesota 11 votes and Missouri 13 votes for the GOP and the Presidency.

I disagree. Irving Ives, Jacob Javits, Kenneth Keating, or Nelson Rockefeller would all have provided Nixon with plenty of experience while swinging the North to Nixon.

[johnpressman]

Irving Ives was no longer in office, having retired from the Senate in 1959 due to ill health.  

Jacob Javits was Jewish.  This is a nonstarter for a national candidate in the year 1960.

Kenneth Keating was a Catholic with less than two years tenure in the Senate, elected to Ives' seat.
Putting a Catholic on the ticket as VP would be seen as pandering to the Catholic vote as a counter to Kennedy's religion and might turn off Christian fundamentalist voters in the Midwest and border states.  He had no political following, was not a particularly effective campaigner and I question his ability to swing NY to the GOP.  His short time in the Senate would negate Nixon's "Experience Counts" campaign platform.

No. only Rocky had the (possible) ability to swing NY to the GOP, and he had no interest whatsoever to being Nixon's VP. Indeed, Rocky hoped Nixon would lose so he could run in 1964.

[connally68]

If this was real life, I think Kennedy wins all of the electoral votes in Alabama and Mississippi, and in reality both Eastland and Stennis actively campaigned for Kennedy.

[Kingpoleon]

Irving Ives was no longer in office, having retired from the Senate in 1959 due to ill health.  

Jacob Javits was Jewish.  This is a nonstarter for a national candidate in the year 1960.

Kenneth Keating was a Catholic with less than two years tenure in the Senate, elected to Ives' seat.
Putting a Catholic on the ticket as VP would be seen as pandering to the Catholic vote as a counter to Kennedy's religion and might turn off Christian fundamentalist voters in the Midwest and border states.  He had no political following, was not a particularly effective campaigner and I question his ability to swing NY to the GOP.  His short time in the Senate would negate Nixon's "Experience Counts" campaign platform.

No. only Rocky had the (possible) ability to swing NY to the GOP, and he had no interest whatsoever to being Nixon's VP. Indeed, Rocky hoped Nixon would lose so he could run in 1964.

Kenneth Keating had over a decade of experience in the House, as a staunchly anticommunist, liberal Republican who had his own talk show, which made him pretty popular among House Republicans.

Ha! Javits was very popular - he beat Wagner, the well-liked Mayor, for Senate, Andy’s was the leader of Republican Senate liberals. His Jewish heritage would not hurt him much, if at all. I mean, it wasn’t even too controversial to appoint a Jewish SCOTUS Justice in 1916. Why would that be controversial in 1960?

[johnpressman]

Sorry, I may be much older than you, but America was a very different place in 1960 than it is today, both to the good and bad.

First, a Jewish VP candidate in 1960 would be a definite non-starter.  A Jewish VP would cost Nixon virtually all of his electoral votes and probably would not result in him winning NY.  

Second, I am very familiar with Kenneth Keating, having participated in a debate at school, representing Keating vs Robert Kennedy in the race for Senator from NY in 1964.  Keating was virtually unknown in 1960 and, once again, would not ensure Nixon carrying NY.  Only Rockefeller might carry the state for the GOP.  I say might in that the Catholic vote from NYC and Buffalo could still probably put NY in JFK's total. Nixon, however, thought it was worth the gamble to lose some Southern or border states to try to win NY's 42 electoral votes as Rocky was a terrific campaigner.

As for Rockefeller, he had no interest in being Nixon's running mate in 1960.  Rocky was 4 years older than Nixon and, if Nixon wins, he would have to wait until 1968 to run.  Being born a Rockefeller, anything less than the Presidency itself would be a step down.  Rocky was appointed VP to Ford in 1974 as he would be easy to confirm by the Senate post Watergate.  He was considered a liability to the GOP ticket in 1976 and was asked to step aside for Bob Dole as the VP candidate.

Lastly, Rockefeller, Case, Keating and Javits were all too liberal for the Republican ticket in 1960.  Nixon picked Henry Cabot Lodge, not for his political views or even for his ability (not) to put specific states' electoral votes in Nixon's column.  Nixon believed that Lodge's tenure as UN Ambassador would call attention to Nixon's foreign policy experience.  We saw how that worked.