Potus Geeks Book Review: The Campaign of the Century by Irwin Gellman
History is written by the victors, as author Irwin Gellman reminds us in Campaign of the Century: Kennedy, Nixon and the Election of 1960, this year's first substantive book in the presidential history genre. Many of the most iconic accounts of the 1960 US Presidential election and of the Kennedy legend (such as Theodore White's classic "The Making of the President 1960") have been written by historians and authors friendly and even admiring to the point of adulation for the 35th President. Gellman presents what he purports to be the first significant unbiased account of that election, and in the process, seeks to shatter many of the myths surrounding the epic presidential contest, including the question of whether massive voter fraud in Illinois and Texas skewed the final outcome.
Gellman, who has authored two other books about Nixon, is not without his own biases, but it would be unfair and intellectually dishonest to dismiss his hypotheses on that basis. Gellman frequently compares source material and polling data in order to determine if the objective facts support or dispel many of the hypotheses that Gellman examines. Among these are (1) that Nixon lost the election because of a poor debate performance, (2) that Kennedy's phone call to Coretta Scott King expressing concern for her husband's arrest resulted in a significant shift in the voting pattern for African-Americans, (3) that President Dwight Eisenhower was not supportive of Nixon's campaign, (4) that anti-Catholic sentiment lowered Kennedy's margin of victory, and (5) that there was little or no voting fraud in Illinois and Texas and certainly not enough to affect the outcome of the election.
Gellman traces the political beginnings of both of these candidates, whose tracks paralleled one another in many ways. He contrasts Nixon's humble beginnings from Kennedy's privileged and moneyed background and also compares their records as legislators, as well as their paths to becoming their parties' respective presidential candidates in 1960. Gellman notes that while Nixon had earned the reputation as a ruthless politician because of his hurling accusations against his congressional opponents of being communist sympathizers, many in the news media overlooked Kennedy's moral failing. These included his family's use of money to buy influence and even votes, the use of dirty tricks against his primary opponent Hubert Humphrey in Minnesota and West Virginia, his dishonesty about his Addison's disease, and his many extramarital dalliances.
The author uses extensive polling data (both before the election and exit polling data afterwards) to show that African-American voting trends differed little in 1960 from Eisenhower's two elections despite Republicans having the better record on civil rights. Catholic voters were a significant voting demographic, and those voters broke for Kennedy in large numbers according to polling data, while protestants voted in similar proportions to how they had voted in Eisenhower's two elections.
One of the most interesting parts of the book is Gellman's examination of the numerous allegations of voter fraud for Kennedy in Illinois (primarily in Chicago under Mayor Richard Daley) and in Texas (where it is widely acknowledged even by pro-Democrat historians that Lyndon Johnson had won congressional elections in this manner). The author concedes that because of the destruction of ballots, it is impossible to prove that fraudulent activity skewed the outcome. But he does point to numerous contemporary accounts of questionable activity, including unexplained and unlikely large shifts in the proportion of votes between the two parties compared to past patterns, multiple polls where the number of votes counted grossly exceeded the number of registered voters (where Kennedy always won by large numbers) and the sudden disappearance of ballots after recounts had been ordered by courts. That voter fraud was real seems almost certain, but whether it was significant enough to say that Nixon was robbed of an election victory will never be known.
It is almost always impossible for contemporary election history to be unbiased, and it is also always troubling when history is written by those with a strong personal history of support for one party over another. Gellman gives equal time to those who dispute the historical account of the election of 1960 as presented by Kennedy's fawning admirers. Kennedy's subsequent assassination and the Camelot mystique that followed has made this difficult for many historians. Gellman meets this challenge by trying to back up his contrary arguments with considerable source material and polling data, making his work too significant to dismiss as spin from the other side. It is worthy of consideration by all objective scholars and historians seeking to learn what actually happened in such a close contest, rather than simply accepting those accounts that match their political stripe. A search for history's truth makes this book worthy of reading, with the reader left to reach his or her own conclusions.
Gellman, who has authored two other books about Nixon, is not without his own biases, but it would be unfair and intellectually dishonest to dismiss his hypotheses on that basis. Gellman frequently compares source material and polling data in order to determine if the objective facts support or dispel many of the hypotheses that Gellman examines. Among these are (1) that Nixon lost the election because of a poor debate performance, (2) that Kennedy's phone call to Coretta Scott King expressing concern for her husband's arrest resulted in a significant shift in the voting pattern for African-Americans, (3) that President Dwight Eisenhower was not supportive of Nixon's campaign, (4) that anti-Catholic sentiment lowered Kennedy's margin of victory, and (5) that there was little or no voting fraud in Illinois and Texas and certainly not enough to affect the outcome of the election.
Gellman traces the political beginnings of both of these candidates, whose tracks paralleled one another in many ways. He contrasts Nixon's humble beginnings from Kennedy's privileged and moneyed background and also compares their records as legislators, as well as their paths to becoming their parties' respective presidential candidates in 1960. Gellman notes that while Nixon had earned the reputation as a ruthless politician because of his hurling accusations against his congressional opponents of being communist sympathizers, many in the news media overlooked Kennedy's moral failing. These included his family's use of money to buy influence and even votes, the use of dirty tricks against his primary opponent Hubert Humphrey in Minnesota and West Virginia, his dishonesty about his Addison's disease, and his many extramarital dalliances.
The author uses extensive polling data (both before the election and exit polling data afterwards) to show that African-American voting trends differed little in 1960 from Eisenhower's two elections despite Republicans having the better record on civil rights. Catholic voters were a significant voting demographic, and those voters broke for Kennedy in large numbers according to polling data, while protestants voted in similar proportions to how they had voted in Eisenhower's two elections.
One of the most interesting parts of the book is Gellman's examination of the numerous allegations of voter fraud for Kennedy in Illinois (primarily in Chicago under Mayor Richard Daley) and in Texas (where it is widely acknowledged even by pro-Democrat historians that Lyndon Johnson had won congressional elections in this manner). The author concedes that because of the destruction of ballots, it is impossible to prove that fraudulent activity skewed the outcome. But he does point to numerous contemporary accounts of questionable activity, including unexplained and unlikely large shifts in the proportion of votes between the two parties compared to past patterns, multiple polls where the number of votes counted grossly exceeded the number of registered voters (where Kennedy always won by large numbers) and the sudden disappearance of ballots after recounts had been ordered by courts. That voter fraud was real seems almost certain, but whether it was significant enough to say that Nixon was robbed of an election victory will never be known.
It is almost always impossible for contemporary election history to be unbiased, and it is also always troubling when history is written by those with a strong personal history of support for one party over another. Gellman gives equal time to those who dispute the historical account of the election of 1960 as presented by Kennedy's fawning admirers. Kennedy's subsequent assassination and the Camelot mystique that followed has made this difficult for many historians. Gellman meets this challenge by trying to back up his contrary arguments with considerable source material and polling data, making his work too significant to dismiss as spin from the other side. It is worthy of consideration by all objective scholars and historians seeking to learn what actually happened in such a close contest, rather than simply accepting those accounts that match their political stripe. A search for history's truth makes this book worthy of reading, with the reader left to reach his or her own conclusions.