1960Election

1960Election https://www.dailykos.com/news/1960Election News Community Action Copyright 2005 - Steal what you want Mon, 27 Jan 2020 17:58:50 +0000 Mon, 27 Jan 2020 17:58:50 +0000 Daily Kos rss@dailykos.com (Daily Kos) Daily Kos rss@dailykos.com (Daily Kos) Let's get a few things straight https://www.dailykos.com/story/2018/2/11/1740604/-Let-s-get-a-few-things-straight this is piece occasioned both by the fact as a teacher I often have to correct misconceptions, and sometimes from people who should know better. We all know about the errors in the recent tweet by the current occupant of the Oval Office blaming the Democrats for not fixing DACA given that they had unified control of all three branches of government starting in 2008. Obviously, 1) DACA did not exist until 2012, 2) Obama did not take office until 2009, and 3) it has been almost half a century since a majority of the Justices of the Supreme Court were appointed by Democrats. Let’s go to the last of those issues. Eisenhower left office having appointed 5 of the then sitting Justices. But in 1962 Byron White was appointed by Kennedy to replace Charles Whittaker. That gave Democrats unified control of the government until Richard Nixon took office on January 20, 1969. The Democrats lost their majority on the Court when Harry Blackmun was appointed by Nixon to replace the resigned Abe Fortas in 1970. Since then there has never been a majority of Justices appointed by a Democratic President, although it was 4-4 after the death of Scalia, and Merrick Garland should have been voted on and seated. OF course, the party of the President appointing a Justice can be very deceptive. After all, Republican appointee Blackmun wrote Roe v Wade and Democratic appointee Byron White voted against it. Similarly, the liberal block at times included Republican appointees Earl Warren, William Brennan, and the aforementioned Blackmun. In more recent times perhaps the strongest liberal on the Court was appointed by Gerald Ford, John Paul Stevens, and another consistent liberal vote was David Souter, appointed by the first Bush. The corrupt and immoral Chief Executive is not the only one who is wrong on important things. Think how many Americans believe the 22nd Amendment means a President can only serve two terms. WRONG. That amendment does place a limit — on being ELECTED President. One can be elected twice, or if having served more than half the term of a predecessor, only once. Any former President can become President via succession — from the Vice Presidency, the Congress as Speaker or President Pro Tempore, or as a cabinet member. Thus all living Presidents are still eligible to be President. THe first Bush and Carter are eligible to be elected, the most recent three to become President only by succession having each been elected twice. Changing topics, ask the average American about our system of dating. They are likely to accurately say that BC means “before Christ” but are likely to say AD means “after death.” That is probably easily corrected by asking if that means they don’t believe Jesus lived into adulthood, since it comes from the Latin “Anno Domini” for “Year of the Lord.” Oh, and some have trouble understanding that in this system, which pivots at an inaccurate time even for its claims, does not include a year zero between BC and AD. Scientific knowledge is also pretty weak. Ask the average person why it is warmer in the summer they will say it is because the earth is closer to the sun then. It blows their minds when you point out that when we have winter it is summer in the Southern hemisphere. Of course it has to do with the angle of the sun’s rays, and in theory most people should have learned that in elementary school. And for my final offering, I would once and for all like to dispense with the myth of the supposed nobility of Richard Nixon in 1960 not challenging the “theft” of Illinois by Richard Daley for Jack Kennedy, thereby giving JFK the Presidency. There is no doubt there was corruption in Chicago. There was probably an equal amount downstate for Nixon. But it was irrelevant. In 1960 there were 537 electoral votes: Hawaii and Alaska had been admitted as states in 1959, and beside two Senator each had to be given one representative. But despite the statutory limitation of 435 House Members, you cannot take a representative from one state and give it to another except as part of reapportionment after the decennial census. There were temporarily, until after the election of 1962, 437 House Members. 269 electoral votes were required for victory. Kennedy got 303, Nixon got 219, and Harry F. Byrd of Virginia got 15 (most people do not know that Byrd got any). In those days Illinois had 27 electoral votes. Even had those been switched to Nixon, the result would have been Kennedy 276, Nixon 246, Byrd 15 and Kennedy would still have been elected. And even if Kennedy had dropped below 269, if Nixon did not reach 269 (remember those 15 for Byrd) the election would have gone to the House where the Dems had a solid majority after the 1960 election, 262-175, and Kennedy still would have been elected. Here ends my pedantry for the evening. My wife just got home from out of town and we are going to have a belated supper and catch up with one another. Peace. rss@dailykos.com (teacherken) 1960Election 22ndAmendment Ad BC DonaldTrump Recommended Summer SupremeCourt threebranchesofgovernment Tweet unifiedcontrol _1740604 Mon, 12 Feb 2018 01:55:58 +0000 2012 vs 1960 https://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/9/1159666/-2012-vs-1960 I've been doing a little analysis of the 2012 Presidential election, dividing the country into the eight major geographic areas used by Theodore H. White in "The Making of the President, 1960."  White noted that in the 1960 election Richard M. Nixon carried five areas, while John F. Kennedy carried three.  In 2012  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney each carried four regions, but where they prevailed, and the intensity with which they did so, is interesting. rss@dailykos.com (southdem) 1960Election 2012 Election 2012Election _1159666 Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:52:22 +0000 VOTER FRAUD https://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/3/25/1065932/-VOTER-FRAUD I don't think JFK walked on water, but I also believe the world was lucky the lowly PT Boat Lieutenant was there to call Air Force General Curtis LeMay's bluff in October of 1962, else the world would have faced Armageddon over the Cuban Missile Crises. But speaking politcally, it was also true that John Fitzgerald Kennedy played a crucial role in the formation of two American political myths. On the Democratic side, there is the myth of Camelot. And on the Republican side there is the myth of the bought election. To put it bluntly, J.F. K. did not steal the Presidental election of 1960 – no way, nadda, never happened. rss@dailykos.com (KAMuston) 1960Election History Illinois Politics Texas VoterFraud West Virginia WestVirginia _1065932 Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:00:02 +0000 50 Years Ago Today: JFK https://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/11/8/918721/-50-Years-Ago-Today-JFK On this date in 1960, John Fitzgerald Kennedy was elected the 35th President of the United States.  Today we live in a world in many ways more complicated and more polarized than the one JFK knew.  Yet his words have more relevance today than he could have possibly imagined. rss@dailykos.com (Jon Stafford) 1960Election 1960inauguration History JohnFKennedy _918721 Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:41:08 +0000 the great myth of Chicago Corruption electing JFK https://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/2/679387/-the-great-myth-of-Chicago-Corruption-electing-JFK was just raised again in a comment by the author of <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/2/43853/52515/997/679378">this diary</a>.   So let's put it to bed, once and for all. In 1960, there were 537 electoral votes - HI and AK had been admitted, each given one House seat expanding House to 437 - can't take a House seat away until reapportionment is applied after a census (except for a provision of 1th Amendment never applied). Electoral vote in 1960 JFK 303 Nixon 219 Byrd 15     Harry Byrd of VA got 8 EVs in MS, 6 (of 11) in AL, and 1 (faithless elector in OK). IL had 27 EVs.  So let's do the math, were the state switched to Nixon JFK   303 - 27 = 276 Nixon 219 + 27 = 246 JFK still wins, by 7 more than the 269 then necessary.   And that assumes there was not as much corruption downstate FOR Nixon as is alleged in Chicago for JFK. Le's put this one to bed, PLEASE? Peace. rss@dailykos.com (teacherken) 1960Election effectofIllinois ElectoralVote HarryFByrd JFK Nixon RichardNixon _679387 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:50:23 +0000 An Original Feminist Speaks https://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/4/562498/-An-Original-Feminist-Speaks Today is the 47th birthday of Senator Barack Obama. Historically speaking, is he a young candidate?  Who in history was also cast as a "young man?"   I came across this tidbit from 1960.  I have taken excerpts from a speech given by Eleanor Roosevelt in which she addresses issues relevant even (or especially) today. rss@dailykos.com (smallddem) 1960Election Barack Obama BarackObama EleanorRoosevelt JohnKennedy the1929depression _562498 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:59:23 +0000 Presidential elections and presidential coattails https://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/17/434055/-Presidential-elections-and-presidential-coattails This is the first part of what will likely be a three-part series examining the results of Congressional and Senate races in presidential-election years since 1960. The purpose of this exercise is to get a quick and dirty analysis of how often, and to what extent, the Presidential ticket has a clear effect on downticket races. The conclusion I have come to is that presidential coattails generally matter a good deal less than is perceived. Furthermore, even when there is a clear correlation between results in the Presidential election and in downticket races, this often has more to do with external circumstances affecting the party brand name as a whole, and less to do with the personal appeal of the presidential candidate. To put it another way, I think that the relative strength of the party (or weakness of the opposing party) independent of the candidates, has a lot more to do with the viability of a presidential candidate than vice versa. Presidential candidates don't usually create "wave" elections; they ride them. In order to do this analysis, I’ve gone through -The electoral results in the last 16 Presidential elections, to determine exactly how many House and Senate seats were gained and lost by each party in each election. -The success of each party in winning close Senate races in those years (I used a fairly broad definition of "close" as within eight points). --The "popular vote" totals for House races-the percentage of voters nationwide who voted for a Republican or Democrat for Congress, vis-à-vis the percentage of voters who voted the same way for President, to see how closely they generally match. rss@dailykos.com (Arjun Jaikumar) 1960Election 1964Election 1968election 1972election 2008 Election 2008Election Coattails House President Senate _434055 Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:08:42 +0000