The election that brought politics into the modern age, first with the Democratic Convention and the designed for TV hoopla it provided, and secondly with the TV debates. Kennedy's people understood television, and Nixon's were behind the curve and it cost them. Some intriguingly dubious electoral politics on Kennedy's behalf in the West Virginia primary and in Cook County, Illinois on election day add to the mix. Kennedy's campaign also made extensive use of armies of volunteers, using them to hand write letter to voters and get out votes in traditional low turnout districts. The Nixon camp campaigned in more traditional methods, although they provided no small shortage of sleaze themselves. An undercurrent of vicious anti-Catholicism played well in some parts of the country. The end result was one of the most narrow victories in history, in what can be argued to be one of the most cynical campaigns.

An important election, but I'm not certain it deserves to be called seminal. Kennedy's coalition did not endure beyond a fluky 1964 and the sixties would end with Nixon in the White House. The long term effect on policy is also mixed. Eisenhower's policy was based on massive retaliation in the event of an all-out Soviet invasion of Western Europe, while using alliances to bulwark the periphery. He severely limited American involvement in brushfire wars, worried that such wars would sap American will and drain the American economy. Kennedy urged a flexible response which demanded direct American intervention. We saw the result in Vietnam. Eisenhower's policy was prudent. He understood the limits of our power. Interestingly, Kennedy's most durable contribution to policy was in advocating tax cuts to stimulate the economy, thus foreshadowing Reagan's approach, abandoning Eisenhower's (and Truman's) commitment to a balanced budget.

This was an exciting contest between two young and extraordinarily energetic men. But I really think Kennedy's agents stole it in Illinois & Texas. That's why I hate close elections. Kennedy or Nixon should have won decisively. One other interesting note: I didn't know for many years that these two guys were actually friends.

One of the seminal elections of the 20th Century. Nixon and Kennedy were the political giants of their generation; although at the time they were both viewed as lightweights. This was the first election in which the World War 2 generation would get a choice between two of their own peers. Kennedy initially led going into the campaign in 1959, but Nixon managed to catch up after his celebrated kitchen debate with Nikita Khruschev in the Soviet-American trade show. He was able to strengthen his foreign policy credentials against Kennedy. Most Democrats didn't take Kennedy seriously; the smart money was on Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey and Adlai Stevenson. It was assumed that Kennedy's Catholicism would be an issue, but after winning a strongly contested primarily in rock-ribbed Protestant West Virginia changed that perception. Kennedy had the machinery and the money to win the Democratic nomination; indeed, his in-party opposition largely underestimated him. Lyndon Johnson claimed that it wouldn't take much to kill Kennedy; he was such a sickly person. Hard to image that someone could appear so vital, with viga as Kennedy would say, and be so afflicted with so many diseases. But despite the handicaps he pulled away with victory. Nixon had little difficulty in securing the nomination; as Vice President in the Eisenhower administration, he was seen as by and large the status quo. This election was the first time that two candidates debated on live television. Nixon figured that his sharp debating skills would break the tie that was evident in the polls and take him to victory in November. It didn't turn out that way. Nixon had been sick and in the hospital for 10 days before the debate; Kennedy had been campaigning in California, so he looked tanned and rested. Nixon, despite his earlier uses of television of communication, failed to realize the importance of appearance on television. More substantively, Kennedy used the issue of a missile gap to prove that the US had fallen behind the Russians technologically during the Eisenhower-Nixon administration. This of course wasn't true. Russia was a largely hollow society; Khruschev banged his foot in the United Nations and complained about American U-2 flights, but the reality was that America remained on top at the time. Nixon was politically boxed; the ultimately anti-communist of his generation had just been out-flanked to his right and out-slicked on top of that. Kennedy gained the lead and never looked back. There were four other debates in which Nixon did very well, but not that many people were watching. The election was remarkably close; Kennedy only barely won the popular vote and the electoral college vote was equally close. Nixon almost demanded a recount in Illinois and Texas due to reports of voter fraud in those states. In my opinion, Nixon probably won the thing, but like Al Gore 40 years later, he quite couldn't pull it over the top. Only thing is that the reports of voter fraud were very legitimate in Nixon's case. The political machinery in Illinois pulled all the stops to win the state for the Democrats, including casting ballots on the behest of dead people. But Nixon was bigger than that and chose to put the national interest ahead of his political ambitions. This election didn't start a massive political re-alignment like others, but it was critical in that we were at a juncture in our national life. The people were going to get a young and vigorous new President who embodied the values of the future.

What a great idea -- have a presidential candidate debate! This was the year when TV really made its mark, and Nixon was blitzed by the suave and coherent Kennedy.