The 1960 Election was a unique election for several reasons.  One, the candidates could not have been more opposites.  John Fitzgerald Kennedy was from one of the wealthiest families in America, highly educated at prep schools and Harvard, extroverted, a great public speaker, and his focus was on domestic policy.  Richard Milhous Nixon was from a working class background, modestly educated, introverted, a decent public speaker, and his focus was on international relations.  As would be expected, these two men had very different styles during their campaigns in 1960 and this difference in style was most evident during the presidential debates that year.  The debates themselves were unique for two reasons; One, there was no requirement that debates be held for presidential elections and two, television played a large role for the first time in an election.  The Kennedy-Nixon debates reaffirm their personal styles exhibited during their campaigns as well as show the growing influence television would have in politics.

If Kennedy’s 1960 Campaign contributed one unique aspect to the history of American politics it has to be the importance of image and style.  There had been previous presidents, mainly FDR, who were great communicators but what was unique about Kennedy was that he maintained this image despite many challenges in the campaign.

One of the major challenges was the Catholic question.  No President had ever been Catholic in American history before 1960 so many people were naturally wary of this.  Kennedy’s handling of this issue is a testament to his strong people skills and his personal style.  Jamieson summarizes his solution to this problem: “In a brilliantly executed transformation, Kennedy recast questions of religion as ones of tolerance.  A vote for Kennedy became a sign of open-mindedness, a vote against him a potential sign of bigotry” (Jamieson 125).  Not only did Kennedy successfully answer this question, he made it work to his advantage by saying that open-minded people would vote for him, suggesting that the opposite would vote for Nixon.  This response to the Catholic question also showed that Kennedy was independent of his religious affiliation; since Nixon’s religion was not in question he could not prove his independent decision making as well as Kennedy could.  Kennedy utilized his public speaking skills to further refute this challenge to his candidacy when he addressed the Housing Ministerial Association in September, 1960.  (Jamieson 130)  He calmly answered the Minister’s emotional questions about his religion and convinced them that it was not a threat and they should be questioning him about more important issues, like the spread of communism.  (Jamieson 130)  Halberstam touches on something that is inherent in Kennedy’s response to the Catholic question and many other challenges.  He explains Kennedy’s mastery of televised politics: “deliberately allowing someone else to rig something against you that is, in fact, rigged for you” (Halberstam 325).  The challenges to Kennedy’s candidacy often backfired on the instigators because Kennedy used his persuasive speaking skills and telegenic presence to his advantage.

Another challenge to Kennedy’s candidacy was the question of experience.  Kennedy, at the age of 43, would be the country’s youngest elected President.  Nixon and the Republicans believed that they had a good point here since Nixon was older and had served eight years as the Vice President under President Eisenhower.  They were right, they did have a good case against Kennedy on his experience.  However, Kennedy’s response was just as skillful as his response to the Catholic question.  In a news conference on July 4, 1960, Kennedy responded to the question of his experience by saying, “…I came to the conclusion that I could best serve the United States in that office after 18 years in the service of our nation—first as a Naval Officer in World War II—and for the past fourteen years as a member of Congress” (Jamieson 140).  Kennedy also brought up the fact that he has at least as much experience as many respected Presidents (Truman, Wilson, FDR) and many respected statesmen (William Pitt, Napoleon, and Alexander the Great).  (Jamieson 140)  This two-pronged response during this news conference successfully answered the question of his experience.  He again turned the question around and made it an advantage to him by emphasizing both his military and legislative experience.  If that was not enough, he then proved how irrelevant the question was because great leaders have led at younger ages.  Later, when the question of experience came up he would once again help himself by emphasizing the need for a youthful leader who understands current affairs in a post World War II mindset.  This ability to be spontaneous and quick helped Kennedy throughout the campaign and would certainly work toward his advantage in the debates.

Nixon’s 1960 Presidential campaign also showed his personality, style, and the image he liked to project for himself.  Ambrose describes Nixon in 1960 as “one of the loneliest men in the United States.”  Ambrose elaborates with, “In some measure, this was a consequence of his growing maturity and self-confidence, a positive development, but it also reflected a lack of trust in others”  (Ambrose 557).  Like Kennedy’s campaign these traits became evident in his response to certain challenges he faced during the campaign.  One of his first challenges was salvaging his image after former President Eisenhower had tarnished it to a degree due to a misconceived statement during a press conference.  Nixon decided to launch a series of campaign advertisements to show America who he was.  Carroll Newton, who headed his advertising team, described Nixon: “You couldn’t talk to him.  Nixon wouldn’t take advice about what to say or how.  He said, ‘I’ll just sit in front of the camera and talk.’” (Jamieson 151).  This shows Nixon’s stubbornness and introverted personality because he did not think he needed any help with his image on television.  This also shows the great difference between Nixon and Kennedy in their campaignstyles.  Kennedy would ask and take advice from several campaign advisors, especially concerning his image on television.  Nixon preferred to do things his own way.  This unscripted method worked for Nixon in the past as his arguments on television were very coherent and proved his knowledge of world affairs.  (Jamieson 151)  However, Jamieson points out another key difference between Nixon and Kennedy when he describes Nixon’s unscripted appearance on his television advertisements: “Although by the standards of an entertainment medium the ads were visually bland, their content was salient and Nixon’s delivery fluent and reassuring” (Jamieson 151).  Even though his delivery was “fluent and reassuring” it lacked that charm and vibrancy on television that Kennedy’s appearance conveyed.

Another aspect of Nixon’s campaign was his own brand of anti-elitism.  Part of it was that he was stubborn and did not like taking advice from anybody, similar to the mistakes he made on television by not taking Carroll Newton’s advice before going live.  Another part, and the more relevant part, was that he wanted to appeal to the common man.  He had grown up in a working class family and understood what most Americans had knowledge of and he did not want to try to talk down to them, he simply wanted to talk to them.  Professor of Economics at Columbia, Arthur Burns, offered his help to Nixon in the campaign and even wrote weekly letters full of advice.  Dr. John Hannah, President of Michigan State University, also offered his academic advice on civil defense.  (Ambrose 562)  Nixon did not use much of their advice because he felt that the common voter would not care and therefore it would not be important in his campaign.  Ambrose describes the academics’ advice: “Burns’s suggestions, like those of his colleagues, tended to be esoteric even to an expert like Nixon, and hardly usable on the campaign trail” (Ambrose 562).  Nixon would later write that this was one of his campaign mistakes: “…one of my major regrets was that I had not been able to make better use of the fine group of scholars…” (Ambrose 562).  This also separates Nixon from Kennedy because Kennedy certainly had many elite intellectuals working for his campaign yet he was still able to talk to the common man.  As would later become evident in the debates, Nixon’s lack of ability to connect with the American people the way Kennedy could really hurt him in his campaign.

Bibliography

Ambrose, Stephen. Nixon. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987.

Halberstam, David. The Powers That Be. Knopf Publishers, 1979.

Jamieson, Kathleen. Packaging the Presidency. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.