Was JFK going to drop LBJ from the 64 Ticket ?

[Richard Smith]

Questions:

Does Robert Caro explain why Kennedy is campaigning in Texas in November in 1963 while he is planning to undo this work by dropping Johnson from the ticket?

Does Robert Caro even address this issue?

Does Robert Caro explicitly state that as of November 1963, JFK was still planning on dropping LBJ?




Regardless of how eminent a historian Robert Caro is, I can?t buy his arguments if he does not address this issue.



If JFK was considering dropping LBJ from the ticket, he must have decided not to by the time of the November 1963 trip to Texas.


Presidential candidates campaign in states that are important, that can go either way. They like to campaign in larger states, but what is even more important, they chose states that can go either way. That is why candidates largely avoid campaigning in California or Texas today, because, in all but a landslide election, California will vote Democratic and Texas Republican.

Candidates who campaign in states don?t do stuff that will alienate that state. A candidate won?t campaign in Texas if he is planning on dropping a Texan as his running mate. A candidate won?t campaign in Texas if he is planning, let?s say, not installing the NASA headquarters in Texas but in some other state. If either of these actions are necessary, he needs to write off Texas and campaign in a different state that may go either way.

Before I read Caro's "Passage of Power," I would have agreed there was little or no chance that JFK would drop LBJ.  But Caro makes a decent case.  He notes that by 1963 LBJ had lost most of his political influence from his Senate days, was not well liked in the South due to his promotion of Civil Rights, and had legal trouble.  He was also hated by RFK.  It would have been a big gamble to dump him which is not in character for JFK, but there were some good reasons to do so.  Of course no one will ever know though.  I highly recommend "Passage of Power" to anyone interested in the topic.  A great book.

[Joe Elliott]

Give me a break, no one carried around the oath of office with them back in 63. When Sarah Hughes said to LBJ, "Sorry but I don't have the Oath of Office on me.", he handed her his copy and turned to the small crowd aboard AF1 and said jokingly, "If any of you speak of this, I'll deny it.",  then he turned to his long-time friend, Texas congressman Albert Thomas and smiled, and Thomas returned a wink.

Are you claiming we can?t expect the advisors to the President to always have a copy of the Constitution with them?



There are two statements you could have chosen to make:

Statement 1:

How come when LBJ asked Judge Sarah T. Hughes to administer the oath of office on Air Force One, he happened to have a copy of the oath on hand? Imagine that.

Statement 2:

How come when LBJ asked Judge Sarah T. Hughes to administer the oath of office on Air Force One, he happened to have a copy of the Constitution which contained the oath on hand? Imagine that.

It is clear that Statement 1 is much more effective than Statement 2, which contains more information. From Statement 1, a reader could conclude that this was very suspicious. From Statement 2, such suspicions would not take hold so readily.

Why do CTers spend so much time thinking about what information to reveal and what to conceal, to make the strongest possible point? Is this the tactic of the side with the truth on their side?

And if LBJ's 1st thought after the assassination was that it might have been a commie plot, then why didn't he have the nuclear football with him on AF1? Ans: because he knew the rooskies had nothing to do with it.

I can?t believe the aids who carried the nuclear football would have not accompanied the new President on the afternoon of the assassination as he flew back to Washington D. C.

Question:

Do you have any reference to this claim that President Kennedy did have this but the new President Johnson did not? Can you back this claim up?

[Joe Elliott]

Before I read Caro's "Passage of Power," I would have agreed there was little or no chance that JFK would drop LBJ.  But Caro makes a decent case.  He notes that by 1963 LBJ had lost most of his political influence from his Senate days, was not well liked in the South due to his promotion of Civil Rights, and had legal trouble.  He was also hated by RFK.  It would have been a big gamble to dump him which is not in character for JFK, but there were some good reasons to do so.  Of course no one will ever know though.  I highly recommend "Passage of Power" to anyone interested in the topic.  A great book.

There are a lot of books I could read. Could you provide, in a nutshell, the arguments Caro used to explain why JFK was campaigning in Texas while he was planning on dropping LBJ? Wouldn?t campaigning in a state he wasn?t about to do something negative to be more productive?

Can you provide a Chapter and page reference?

Since different versions of a book may come with different page numbers, something like ?Chapter 4?, which runs from pages 129 through 157, on page 154 contains this . . .? would be helpful.



If Caro failed to address this issue, it would cause me to suspect his judgment. Even if he is right. A good historian should anticipate and deal with any obvious flaws with his theory.

[Jerry Organ]

Before I read Caro's "Passage of Power," I would have agreed there was little or no chance that JFK would drop LBJ.  But Caro makes a decent case.  He notes that by 1963 LBJ had lost most of his political influence from his Senate days, was not well liked in the South due to his promotion of Civil Rights, and had legal trouble.  He was also hated by RFK.  It would have been a big gamble to dump him which is not in character for JFK, but there were some good reasons to do so.  Of course no one will ever know though.  I highly recommend "Passage of Power" to anyone interested in the topic.  A great book.

I imagine many in the South hated the abrasive and manner-less RFK.

[John Iacoletti]

Are you claiming we can?t expect the advisors to the President to always have a copy of the Constitution with them?

Since when do government officials care what the Constitution says?

Why do CTers spend so much time thinking about what information to reveal and what to conceal, to make the strongest possible point? Is this the tactic of the side with the truth on their side?

If you mean LNers, then yes, this is absolutely the tactic that they use.

[John Iacoletti]

There are a lot of books I could read. Could you provide, in a nutshell, the arguments Caro used to explain why JFK was campaigning in Texas while he was planning on dropping LBJ? Wouldn?t campaigning in a state he wasn?t about to do something negative to be more productive?

There was a schism in Texas between the conservative "Connally" Democrats and the liberal "Yarborough" Democrats.  He was hoping to help unify them so that they wouldn't split the vote.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

There are a lot of books I could read. Could you provide, in a nutshell, the arguments Caro used to explain why JFK was campaigning in Texas while he was planning on dropping LBJ? Wouldn?t campaigning in a state he wasn?t about to do something negative to be more productive?

Can you provide a Chapter and page reference?

Since different versions of a book may come with different page numbers, something like ?Chapter 4?, which runs from pages 129 through 157, on page 154 contains this . . .? would be helpful.



If Caro failed to address this issue, it would cause me to suspect his judgment. Even if he is right. A good historian should anticipate and deal with any obvious flaws with his theory.

Here's Caro in 2013 on the issue. It's brief but interesting. My guess is that JFK hadn't yet decided on what to do (if he still though he would need Texas, would he have dropped LBJ for Connally?).
                                         ________________________

Question: Was it a given that LBJ would have been on the ticket for a second Kennedy term?

Caro: No. It was a very open question. When you talk about the president?s trip to Texas in November 1963, there is a very revealing element. Kennedy invited Gov. Connally to come to Washington to meet with him about the trip. He didn?t invite LBJ.

When I was visiting Connally on his ranch, I talked to him about this. He told me that the Johnsons knew he was coming to Washington and they had invited him over for dinner. Then they found out that he was meeting with the president and that Johnson hadn?t been invited.

Source/link: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2013/10/25/qa-robert-caro-on-viewing-kennedy-through-lbjs-eyes

[Richard Smith]

There are a lot of books I could read. Could you provide, in a nutshell, the arguments Caro used to explain why JFK was campaigning in Texas while he was planning on dropping LBJ? Wouldn?t campaigning in a state he wasn?t about to do something negative to be more productive?

Can you provide a Chapter and page reference?

Since different versions of a book may come with different page numbers, something like ?Chapter 4?, which runs from pages 129 through 157, on page 154 contains this . . .? would be helpful.



If Caro failed to address this issue, it would cause me to suspect his judgment. Even if he is right. A good historian should anticipate and deal with any obvious flaws with his theory.

I just recommended the book.  Not volunteering as your research assistant.  Caro is the foremost historian on LBJ.  All you have to do is Google him if you want to know his credentials.  If you are interested in the topic, read his book.  If not, don't.  I've explained his arguments as best I can remember.  LBJ was increasingly unpopular in the south because of his evolving stance on Civil Rights.  As a local politician running for office in Texas in his earlier career, LBJ was never a civil rights advocate.  Once his aspirations became the presidency, he realized that he could not be viewed as a southern segregationist and win national office.  So he alienated many of his previous supporters in places like Texas by strongly supporting Civil Rights.  As a result, it's not clear that dropping LBJ from the ticket would have hurt JFK in Texas.  In fact, it might have helped him in the South depending on who he decided to replace him with.  Perhaps another more popular Southerner.  I don't think any decision had been made on dropping LBJ by Nov. 22.  So your question contains a false premise as to why JFK would campaign in Texas while planning on dropping LBJ.  He had not made any decision at that point. 

btw:  Caro who has reviewed more documents and interviewed more people associated with LBJ than anyone else indicated he came across no evidence of his involvement in the JFK assassination.  And Caro has leveled some fairy damning criticisms of LBJ.  So it is not a case of subject envy.