Six Crises (66 page)

We looked at the trends, state by state. We had very little from New York at that time but, with nearly 50 per cent of the vote in, Kennedy was leading in Pennsylvania by 300,000. In our analyses, we had figured on only a fighting chance in New York, a fair chance in Pennsylvania with the state leaning to Kennedy, a better than even chance in Ohio, a fair chance in Michigan but again leaning to Kennedy, an even chance in Illinois, and both Texas and California close but leaning to Nixon.

John Chancellor reported from the Midwest that Nixon had moved into the lead in that area generally but, with regard to Illinois, he said flatly: “It's a runaway; Kennedy's lead is insurmountable.”

At 7:30, NBC reported the odds on a Kennedy victory at 250 to 1. Reports from New York were by no means yet conclusive but Kennedy had a substantial lead—in New York City—and we were not gaining as much upstate as we had hoped.

By eight o'clock (eleven, Eastern Time) we had thought everything would be over but the shouting. But eight came and went, only 20 million of an estimated probable final total of 70 million votes had been recorded—and the fight was far from over.

By this hour, Arizona, Florida, and Tennessee had fallen into the Nixon column. Kennedy had jumped to an early lead in California, based on scattered returns from primarily metropolitan areas. He had carried Missouri and Rhode Island—as expected. NBC's computer predicted a Kennedy electoral landslide, with a final count of 401 electoral votes (out of 537).

At 8:30 we took a close, hard look at the seven big decisive states. Only 40 per cent of New York State was in, but we felt Kennedy's lead there was more than we could overcome. Bob Finch called Tom Dewey and our feelings were confirmed. Kennedy's eventual margin in New York was to be 375,000 votes out of 7.3 million cast—a substantially better showing for us than the 800,000-vote Kennedy margin the usually reliable New York
Daily News
poll had indicated when we were in New York two-and-a-half weeks before election—but not enough.

There was also bad news from Pennsylvania: Kennedy's margin was now 115,000. Before giving up completely on that key state, however, we called Hugh Scott to get his appraisal. He had been confident that we would carry Pennsylvania, though by a close margin, because he believed we would come to the Philadelphia line with a lead of 200,000 votes. We had in fact reached that goal—but a Kennedy land-slide
in Philadelphia of over 300,000 votes, exceeding even the huge margins that Roosevelt had rolled up in the depths of the depression, had wiped out our outstate lead.

Ohio by this time was safely in our column. We were rolling toward a margin of 275,000 votes in this state which Kennedy's private pollster, Lou Harris, had predicted he would carry by at least 200,000. Only 45 minutes earlier, Stuart Novins of CBS had said: “Whereas Cleveland is delivering for Kennedy, Cincinnati is not doing as well as expected for Nixon. Therefore, it looks like Kennedy in Ohio.”

At 8:30, CBS had given Illinois to Kennedy, although less than 50 per cent of the vote was in. Reports from Michigan were still not decisive, but at eight John Chancellor of NBC had observed: “Ohio and Michigan ought to make the Democrats a little bit anxious. The Nixon lead is holding in Ohio; and in Michigan, Wayne County is not as strong for Kennedy as expected.”

Then came our most discouraging news. Texas had been a ding-dong battle from the beginning but with most all of the vote in, it appeared that Kennedy would carry the state by about 40,000 out of a 2.3 million vote total. And that is the way it ended up: another plus for the “corn pone special.”

Less than 10 per cent of the California vote was in, with Kennedy still holding a slight lead. Consequently, no predictions could be made.

I did some quick computing on the yellow pad on which I was jotting down these results. With Kennedy carrying New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas, we had to win three of the other big four—California, Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio. The prospects were not encouraging but we were a long way from giving up. There were still a lot of votes to be recorded.

But the TV commentators were going all out in predicting a Kennedy victory—or perhaps the better word is “conceding.” Eric Sevareid, just before eight, had said: “A Kennedy victory is now beyond any reasonable doubt. It would be a very difficult feat for him now to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.” Dave Brinkley, on NBC at 8:15, said: “Kennedy at this moment, on these returns, has well over enough to make it as President.” Grant Holcomb of CBS, reporting from the West, commented: “Senator Kennedy is doing very well in the West. It would appear that Kennedy is going to carry California by a very considerable margin.” At the time he said this, only 8 per cent of California's precincts had reported. Newspapers that had been supporting the Republican ticket joined in the stampede. Charles Collingwood
of CBS reported that the New York
Daily News
had declared Kennedy the winner.

Actually the Kennedy highwater mark had now been reached. At nine o'clock, the western returns began coming in, with substantial leads for Nixon in Idaho, Washington, and Utah. California still showed a slight Kennedy lead with 15 per cent of the vote recorded, and Governor Pat Brown predicted—according to CBS—“Kennedy will carry California by 800,000 votes.” Two hours later, he changed this estimate: he raised it to an even million!

What was particularly significant was this: while Kennedy led in the popular vote as well as the electoral vote, his popular margin was not increasing. On the contrary, as the total mounted, his lead narrowed. It was 1.7 million at nine. By 9:45, it was down to 1.6 million.

As the midwestern and western returns piled in, we rolled up victory after victory in the farm belt. Iowa, Kansas, North and South Dakota, and Nebraska joined Indiana and Ohio in our column.

It was now midnight in the East and nine o'clock in the West. In the next hour and a half, I believed a sufficient number of votes would be counted in the West and Midwest for us to make a final determination whether the Kennedy trend was to continue or whether our hopes were still alive. Between nine and ten, “victory statements” and “concession statements” were being recorded, coming from prominent Democrats and Republicans alike. Adlai Stevenson, at 9:30, said: “I am elated at the prospect of a sweeping victory for Jack Kennedy.” Five minutes later, Walter Cronkite interviewed Barry Goldwater and reported over CBS: “Well, that's it. Goldwater wrote off Nixon's chances to win in this presidential race.” At 9:45, the New York
Herald Tribune,
which had supported the Nixon-Lodge ticket, conceded to Kennedy. At ten, the Chicago
Sun-Times,
another paper that supported our ticket, declared Kennedy the winner. And at 10:15, the New York
Times,
which had endorsed Kennedy, declared that he had won. But as the western and midwestern returns continued to come in, Kennedy's popular vote margin which earlier in the evening had been as high as 2 million, was fading away: by 10:30, it was down to 1.1 million. UPI commented at this point: “This seems mighty close compared with vote counts of previous years.” Between 10 and 10:30 we learned that we were doing far better in the West than we had dared hope. We were able to add Washington, Wyoming, and Colorado to our column.

But some commentators were already speculating as to what I
would do after my defeat. David Brinkley of NBC, at 10:15, said: “Nixon is a lawyer. He will probably wind up in some high-paying corporate job.” Despite the ever-narrowing popular vote margin and our surprising strength throughout the West, NBC and CBS were still insisting that California was in the bag for Kennedy. Grant Holcomb put it this way: “One of the things about California is that once the trend is established, it very, very seldom changes. It would be surprising indeed if this trend of Kennedy winning California changed.” Merrill Muller of NBC went further: “Kennedy has California and the national election.” NBC's computer predicted a Kennedy victory in the state at odds of 7 to 3—this at 10:30. Holcomb reported at that time that the San Francisco
Chronicle
and the Los Angeles
Examiner
had both conceded California to Kennedy.

The commentators and observers were now turning to analyses of the vote by racial and religious patterns. Howard K. Smith said at eleven: “Our tentative conclusion would be that Kennedy lost a little by being a Catholic, but he gained a great deal more.”

The popular vote margin continued to narrow. As each new batch of votes was recorded, I was gaining more of them than Kennedy.

Shortly after eleven (two o'clock Eastern Time) I decided I had to make a decision, one way or the other, about issuing a statement. I asked Don Hughes to round up our key advisers. First to enter my room were Len Hall and Cliff Folger. These two men had been with me on that cold evening back in November 1958, when we decided to start down the long road which seemed now to be ending at such a heartbreaking destination.

They could not have been more magnificent. Len Hall had a big smile on his face, shook my hand, and—acting for all the world as if nothing more serious had happened than that he had just lost two dollars on a horse race—said, “It's a real squeaker.” I knew his heart was breaking. No one had worked longer or harder for our cause. Cliff Folger, my finance chairman, was just as fine. I mentioned that one of my major regrets was that I felt I had let down those who had contributed so generously to the campaign. His eyes flashed as he answered: “Why, don't you think that for a minute. All of these fellows had a real run for their money. We'll try again and next time we'll beat them to a pulp!”
⁸

Bob Finch, Fred Seaton, and Herb Klein joined us and I told them all that I thought the time had come for me to make some kind of a statement. Seaton was particularly opposed to my making an outright concession. He had just had a call from Jim Worthy in Illinois, and another from Ev Dirksen's top assistant, Harold Rainville. Both agreed that, if the present trend continued there, we were gaining enough in each downstate precinct to overcome the lead Kennedy had built up in Cook County. Worthy, incidentally, was to point out to me several months later that after I made my statement at 12:20, which was interpreted by some as a concession, the Republican poll-watchers downstate gave up and went home. In his opinion this contributed to our loss by the razor-thin margin of 8000 votes.

But I gave the group my own analysis. While we were leading Kennedy in the number of states carried (and it was to end up that way, 26 to 23, with one state uncommitted), he now had New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Michigan for sure. With Ohio definitely in our column, we still had to win California, Illinois, and one other state-possibly Minnesota—in order to overtake him. The odds were strongly against that happening. I thought we would win California because I knew there were a quarter-of-a-million absentee ballots out, traditionally heavily Republican, and that they would be decisive in view of the closeness of the vote at that hour. But we were still 40,000 behind in Illinois. Absentees had been opened and counted there and I considered our chances of pulling through very remote, the more so in view of a call we had just received from a good friend and very experienced Illinois political observer, John Drieske of the Chicago
Sun-Times.
He had told us a few minutes before that it just wasn't in the cards for us to take the state.

I felt that by midnight I would have to make a statement of some sort—one in good grace but, at the same time, one that would not let down our legion of supporters who still had hopes we might pull the election out of the bag. Bob Finch brought in stacks of wires and phone messages urging me not to concede until all the votes were in. Herb Klein, on the other hand, said many in the press corps thought I had already waited too long and was being “a poor sport” in not conceding—especially in view of the fact that some of the major Republican papers, like the
Herald Tribune
and the
Sun-Times,
had long since given up.

I finally decided, at about 11:30, that I would make a statement to the group of loyal supporters who had been listening to returns all
evening long down in the ballroom and whom I would have greeted much earlier had it not been for the indecisiveness of the result.

Pat was still upstairs in her suite with the girls. We had agreed that they would not join me until we knew what the result would be. As the evening dragged along, I kept putting off calling them in the hope the tide might eventually turn in our direction. Now I could wait no longer. Don Hughes went up to get them. At 11:30, Pat walked into my room with Helene Drown and Tricia. Both Pat and Tricia were wearing the new dresses they had bought for the occasion, Tricia in blue and Pat in a gray-green flowered print. No one could have guessed as they came into the room that things had been going against us. All evening long, Pat had been telling Tricia and Julie—who had gone to bed earlier—that the news would get better as the West came in.

Tricia greeted me with, “Hi Daddy, how is the election coming?”

For a fleeting moment I didn't have the heart to tell them what I had concluded from the trend of the returns. But then I knew I could no longer put off preparing them for the bad news that was to come.

I replied, almost too bluntly, “I'm afraid we have lost, honey.”

Tricia, who had been smiling bravely up to this point, began to cry uncontrollably. She said through her tears: “I'm not crying because of myself but for you and Mommy. You have worked so hard and so long.”
⁹

It was difficult for all of us to keep our tears in check as she spoke.

I then told Pat that I thought the two of us should go down to the ballroom to greet those who had been waiting it out so patiently. She asked me what I intended to say. I replied: “I don't intend to make an outright concession, but the least I can do is to indicate that, if the present trend continues, Kennedy will be elected.”