Was JFK going to drop LBJ from the 64 Ticket ?

[Joe Elliott]

I think you're making a mistake in assuming that Texas loved LBJ -- especially Dallas.

Well, if I made a mistake, JFK made a bigger one for not choosing a running mate who could help him win an important state that could go either way.

Could LBJ help win Dallas? Not really. It was conservative and very much against Civil Rights. But Texas on the whole was not so extreme. Texas voted for the Democratic candidate for President throughout the 1960?s, unlike the deep South. LBJ was helpful in swinging Texas JFK?s way in 1960 and would be again in 1964, if he was still on the ticket.

[Joe Elliott]

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 it in his pocket? Imagine that.

The oath of the office for the President of the United States is included in Article Two of the U. S. Constitution. It is inconceivable that the President, and his advisors would not carry copies of the Constitution with them wherever they may go. Some coincidence indeed.

[Joe Elliott]

The Constitution also states that there is an automatic transfer of power, thus, LBJ didn't need to be sworn in. Since he was carrying a copy of the Constitution according to you then he should have known this.

LBJ knew this but perhaps the Soviets didn?t. If not, this public ceremony, immediately announced to the world, would remove any doubts about whether the United States had a President of the United States. Or any doubts if the United States would be able to respond, immediately, to any sudden attack, nuclear or otherwise.

[Joe Elliott]

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 it in his pocket? Imagine that.

When Jack made this post, he would have known that there was a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why LBJ would have a copy of the oath to the office of the President of the United States. It is contained within the U. S. Constitution. Or the person who relayed this information to Jack would have known. Either Jack should be ashamed, or angry at the person who gave him incomplete information.

But this is the tactic that I see CTers use time and time again. Give one some information. But not the total story, which would nullify or largely nullify the information they provided. It is the tactic of the side with a weak case for the truth.

[John Iacoletti]

The Constitution also states that there is an automatic transfer of power, thus, LBJ didn't need to be sworn in. Since he was carrying a copy of the Constitution according to you then he should have known this.

He wanted the photo op.

[John Iacoletti]

The oath of the office for the President of the United States is included in Article Two of the U. S. Constitution. It is inconceivable that the President, and his advisors would not carry copies of the Constitution with them wherever they may go. Some coincidence indeed.

Then why did LBJ call Bobby to get the oath?  Just to rub it in?

[Jack Trojan]

The oath of the office for the President of the United States is included in Article Two of the U. S. Constitution. It is inconceivable that the President, and his advisors would not carry copies of the Constitution with them wherever they may go. Some coincidence indeed.

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.

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.

[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.