Introduction John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Richard Nixon were the two candidates in the 1960 U.S. presidential election. The young Democratic senator from Massachusetts and the elder Republican vice president from California were quite different in many respects. Kennedy was a Catholic and Nixon was a Quaker, neither of which were popular religions amongst the average American citizens in 1960. However, once the two men gained their party’s nomination for candidate, Americans expected the election to continue as usual. Keeping to the status quo, the candidates campaigned, attended rallies, and gave speeches to appeal to the American people to try and gain their votes. What was not expected was the practice of a televised presidential debate, especially not four in a matter of two months. The series of debates ended up being significant in the outcome of the election, as many people believed Kennedy won the debates and he won the presidency in one of the closest elections ever at the time (Levy). The debates, more importantly, also carried an impact for years to come, affecting the way political campaigns have taken place, all the way through the presidential election in 2016
Historical Context Prior to 1960, no presidential candidates had ever taken part in a debate against each other. Also before 1960, many American families relied upon the radio, not the television, as their source of information, news, and entertainment. Because of these changes that began to occur in the 1960 presidential election, the first debate was destined to be one for the ages. Assuming all external factors were perfect in favor of both candidates, the debate would be one that would shape the political landscape for decades, shifting the way the American voter views an election. However, the events leading up to the election for the two candidates were about as different as the candidates themselves. For Kennedy leading up to the first debate, everything that could go right did go right. He was campaigning up until the night of the debate, he was healthy, vibrant, and paving his path to the presidency. For Nixon, however, what could go wrong did go wrong. While campaigning in North Carolina, Nixon banged his knee on a car door when exiting, which lead to an infection that had to have him hospitalized. While in the hospital he developed a fever and a battle with the flu, so his health was not in the best condition. After leaving the hospital just days before the debate, on the night of the debate, he banged the same knee into another car door, further worsening his injury. In the studio, not used to television, Nixon pancaked his face in makeup to make himself appear healthy to the American public. Kennedy on the other hand, looked natural and elegant with his stage appearance, opting for little to no makeup at all. The appearances alone could have the ability to impact the election if Nixon appeared as close to death as he may have felt. Due to the stark contrast in the two candidates’ physical appearances, the outcome of the debate varied greatly by which medium it was consumed. If an individual listened to the debate over radio, a primary form of entertainment in the years prior, they were more likely to consider the outcome “a draw, with some giving the Republican contender the edge”. However, those who watched the debate on television, “it was no contest” (Botelho). Significantly, the debate was remembered little for its substance, more for its style. Russell Baker, a well-known reporter for The New York Times at the time of the debate, wrote an article the day after the historic first debate and outlined the content that was covered—although he does not avoid mentioning the style element also. Even in 1960, to American voters who had no prejudice about how a president should appear on television, the appearances were clearly significant, as Baker writes that Kennedy appeared “suitable for a candidate for the highest office in the land” (Baker), while nothing of the sort was mentioned about Nixon. Baker’s argument throughout his article, for the most part, was a retelling of the events that occurred surrounding the first debate. However, he deviates his argument at times to reference the electability of candidates and their support by the American people; after discussing the crowd there to cheer on Kennedy and to simply see him exit his car, Baker then says, “There was no evidence of any Nixon rooting section” (Baker). To an average voter, reading this article a little over one month prior to the general election would lead them to believe that the election was out of reach for Nixon. Kennedy was simply too electable, presidential, and supported to lose. However, this was not true, given that this election was the closest of its time since 1916, and is still one of the closest elections in the United States to date.
Click on the picture to read an article from 1960 written about the first debate.
Rhetorical Analysis The 1960 presidential debates involved verbal arguments, of course, but also consisted of many rhetorical appeals by the candidates, as well as those reporting the coverage. For Kennedy, his argument—seen in the published video from the first debate of the series—is focused in his demeanor. He sets out to portray to the American public that he is not only capable to serve in the role of the president, but also is the best option for this role of the two men on stage. When watching the debate, it is apparent that Kennedy is focused, prepared, and serious—all attributes that are desirable in somebody leading the free world in the beginning of the Cold War. Kennedy appeared ready for the new challenge of television, as his presidential behavior was relayed well over television and radio alike, appealing to a greater number of listeners. With the emergence of television has been an introduction of “a more image-based political environment”, beginning with and benefitting John F. Kennedy. Images, as explained, “Enhance political learning”, which most definitely would benefit Kennedy as more of what he said would have been retained and applied in a way that can make him seem more knowledgeable and presidential to the television viewer (Druckman). Kennedy, primarily appeals to the viewers’ sense of ethos and pathos, by verbally arguing for what he planned, making himself seem credible and prepared to be president. The pathos argument made by him was in his demeanor, as discussed earlier, relating the pre-established ideals and values of what it means to be a president and acting upon that. He tries to seem relatable, personable, and powerful over the television, which ended up being the best for him, assisting in his future victory in the election. The arguments made by Richard Nixon were more focused on the facts and claims he spoke. His recurring arguments were for qualification, leadership, and competence, all centered on the ethos rhetorical appeal. Nixon frequently made claims that Kennedy was “too immature for the Presidency”, something that was a key argument made throughout his campaigning (Baker). Nixon, who was the vice president at the time, believed that this experience was more valuable than Kennedy’s role as a senator in being an effective leader and president; his goal was to make the American people believe this same thing. Nixon was not the most attractive, charismatic, or personable candidate ever; he was not even more so compared to Kennedy. So his arguments strayed away from pathos and connecting to the voter and went more to ethos and trying to create trust in his ability to lead. This argument was mostly aimed at the radio listeners, with Nixon almost disregarding the fact that the debates were being televised. He smiled more, trying to seem friendly, but he was more successful in making his claims and in the debate entirely when listened to via radio compared to television (Botelho). That said, Nixon’s failure to adjust to television as well is evidence that what the argument being made is always is overshadowed by how the argument is made. Nixon’s effectiveness and medium preference was simply not as impactful as Kennedy’s. Another argument made by the two candidates in the debates, as discussed by both scholars and reporters, is the precedent set for the quality and civility of argumentation for future debates over the presidency. The high standard for future debates was established by how the men carried themselves with grace and dignity, never getting tacky or too offensive and remaining civil. “In one of the evening's few shows of incipient heat”, Russell Baker says in The New York Times the day after the first debate, Kennedy claims that Nixon’s statement was “wholly wrong wholly in error” (Baker). This “heat” paralleled with debates that existed in the years following, the contentiousness may have grown greater, but traditionally those who lost their temper the greatest and most frequently were the candidates who were behind and ended up losing the debate. Research has been done to clarify just how important political campaign debates are, in forming opinions, influencing behavior, and predicting the outcome of the elections, but what has remained clear is the high standard for debates that John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon established in September of 1960 (McKinney).
Argument The verbal arguments made by John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in the four 1960 presidential debates were important at the time and to the voters in the election, although probably not the most significant variable on the outcome. Moreover, what was said is next to irrelevant in 2017, forgettable at best. The critical elements of the debates and the election entirely are those that carried a lasting impression into the future, most easily recognized in the 2016 presidential election. First, the presence of the three presidential debates in 2016 is a direct effect from 1960. Prior to 1960, there were no debates, so Kennedy and Nixon’s venture into this realm of campaigning created the possibility for the candidates in the future. While there were no debates after 1960 until 1976, the idea was placed into the heads of the voters and candidates alike, creating pressure and the possibility of a debate any election season. After 1976, as proof, there has been at least one debate held each election, with candidates probably being seen as “chicken” if they even considered not participating in the nearly mandatory campaign events (Greene). The lack of an option in regards to a debate is due in large part thanks to the decision of Kennedy and Nixon to stand in front of the American people on television in 1960. Another critical impact of this decision by the two candidates is the change in perception of the ideal presidential candidate. In 1960 when JFK was named candidate, many people questioned his religion of Catholicism and whether it was suitable for a president. There was an idea that the president is a Protestant, primarily, because there was concern about a Catholic president’s allegiances. There was doubt and concern whether Kennedy would surrender authority to the Pope or whether his allegiance would remain to the United States. Since this election, this is no longer a concern. In 2016, the question about allegiances was whether Donald Trump would surrender his business ties to avoid a conflict of interest between his financial prosperity and what was best for his country he was being tasked with leading. This situation was eerily similar to that of 1960. Proving that in some regards, campaigning never truly changes too drastically. A counterexample, however, of campaigns and elections changing greatly is that in what is considered “presidential”. In appearance, mannerisms, ideas, etc. what is seen as proper and presidential has changed since the 1960 election, specifically the debates. Kennedy, in the debates, remained serious and focused, appearing as a modern president is expected. Nixon chose to appear friendlier by smiling more than Kennedy, which came across as less presidential.
Conclusion In 1960, there were many events in the future of the United States that could not have been predicted, many of which were traumatic or life-changing. From the JFK assassination to Watergate all the way to the legalization of gay marriage, each event was a consequence of events leading up to it. To say that the 1960 presidential debate was a just another event in the scope of modern American history would be an understatement. In history, actions lead to consequences, as was the case in 1960 and will be in 2960. This particular set of presidential debates is forever significant because of the historical context that led up to it, with the emergence of television, the Cold War, and space exploration; the impact of the debates also lead to their relevance in American history, establishing credibility and a connection between the election process and the American citizen other than just voting. The impacts made in the political environment are long-lasting, still to this day nearly 57 years later, and will guarantee the 1960 presidential election a special place in the formation of the landscape that is expected every four years.