He had leadership-cred to burn after the Cuban Missile Crisis. OTOH, there was already a lot of hate and backlash against him just for his cautious sympathizing with the Civil Rights movement, and JFK had not the Southern-cred LBJ had. There is an ancient Vulcan proverb: “Only Nixon could go to China.” And perhaps only LBJ could sign the Civil Rights Act and get away with it.
His public opinion polls were decreasing in 1963 but he was still very popular. But Bush the Elder was extremely high in his 3 year and went on to lose to little known Bill Clinton.
Mainly because of the recession. There was none in 1964.
We’ll never know, but JFK had good reason to be optimistic. His likely opponents were Barry Goldwater or Nelson Rockefeller. Goldwater would have had a very hard time winning, and Rockefeller would have had a 50-50 chance at best.
Are we proposing he survives unscathed (or the assassination is never attempted) or is he just wounded? I figure he has an excellent chance at re-election unless significantly disabled, and his initial wound (the one that penetrated his back and emerged from his throat) might have done so.
I can’t see why he would have lost. He was still quite popular and I don’t recall anything from that time period that would have caused people to want to make a switch…nor any strong Republican candidate that would have come along and ousted him. The space program was ticking along, and certainly race relations and civil rights were perking up, but I think that JFK would have handled those similarly to how Johnson did (well, maybe not as hard ball a style)…and in '64 they still hadn’t come up to a full boil yet for the election, nor do I see it as having a major impact. The economy was doing fairly well, we weren’t heavily involved in Vietnam to the point where it was on the public’s radar wrt it being a highly negative issue.
This Denver Post article (if you click on the link, I apologize in advance for the oppressive advertising and, as is always the case with online newspapers, read the comments following the article at your own peril) from this morning provides a pretty good context of what historians and others believe would have happened during and after a potential JFK re-election (being the Denver Post, a lot of it has a U.S. Western perspective). The Civil Rights Act question, I think, is most compelling – just like “Only Nixon could go to China,” I wonder if only LBJ could have pushed the act through Congress.
I was thinking the first.
ISTM that LBJ used the political capital generated by the assassination to push thru the Civil Rights bills. Without that? Maybe it would have been watered down.
But you are correct that it took a Democrat - they controlled both houses, and a higher proportion of Republicans voted for the Act than did Democrats, IIRC. So they needed a legislative genius like LBJ to push the laws thru against the wishes of the Dixicrats of the Solid South.
Regards,
Shodan
Well, all kinds of crazy stuff could have happened between Novembers '63 and '64, but without specific scenarios like worsening health problems or the press changing its policies about reporting potential White House sex scandals, I’d give the edge to Kennedy.
The 1992 election was so unusual as to be have virtually no value as a precedent, in my opinion.
Oh, yeah, that’s another thing. JFK was popping a lot of pills – for his back problem, or at least that’s how it started.
National Lampoon (back when it used to be funny, tm) had the JFK Fifth Inaugural issue, based on the premise that it was Jackie who died from Oswald’s sniping.
One of the predictions was that Kennedy gets the U.S. into a ground war in Northern Ireland, protecting the Catholics from the evil onslaught of the Orangemen. One of the public figures leading the pro-war movement was “Fighting Priest” Daniel Berrigan…
And the political poster of the day was one of pretty flowers with the slogan, “War is Healthy for the Economy and Other Growing Things.”
Ah, those were the days…
He would have been the incumbent, which is worth a lot. There was no major crisis in 1964. And the historical Republican nominee was Goldwater.
I figure Kennedy would have done at least as well as Johnson did and Johnson won by a landslide.
I agree. Johnson was uniquely placed to enact significant civil rights legislation. He was a southerner who actually cared about civil rights. He was a master at legislating. And he was able to call on the legacy of an assassinated President. It was a combination of very unlikely circumstances.
Nevertheless, it appears in hindsight that it was only a matter of time. Probably would have passed in JFK’s second term.
Fair enough, I see little reason to think he would not have been re-elected.
Of course it is a valuable precedent WRT the spoiler effect of a significant third-party/independent candidacy. A precedent which again held in 2000.
Assassination is attempted, but survives unscathed: Yes
Assassination is attempted, but survives wounded: Yes
No assassination attempt: Yes
I also believe the Civil Rights Act would come in dribs and drabs over the next 20+ years, likely pushing back a black President by the same length of time. Kennedy had health problems, but he would have easily lasted out two terms even if comatose*: LBJ would certainly be happy being a shadow President for two+ years**, and the real President for another eight. In '68 LBJ would run against Nixon, and if he wins, that likely puts the Democrats in the WH for 8 years… and after that, who the hell knows? I see Reagan v. Ted Kennedy in '76 and/or '80… that would have been an interesting campaign.
- Weekend at Kennedy’s
** This is assuming that he doesn’t screw things up and make it impossible for a sitting Democratic VP to win in '68, unlike the real world in which… oh, shit. Well, I guess we’re stuck with Tricky Dick no matter what happens. 
I believe that he quite likely would have been re-elected, but there’s a very good chance, given all his health problems, that he would have died from natural causes before 1968.