Talk:1960 United States presidential election/Archive 3

3rd debate
include a photo of a newspaper article previewing the debate noting the panel would also be in LA but a different studio than Nixon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.45.248 (talk) 18:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Debate viewership numbers
The table at the start of the Debates section uses TV viewership numbers from debates.org, and those numbers range from 66.4 to 60.4 million viewers. However, the later text says "An estimated 70 million viewers watched the first debate" (citing the Museum of Broadcast Communications) and "However, up to 20 million fewer viewers watched the three remaining debates than the first" (without citation). Do we need to pick one set of numbers as "more accurate," or should there be a qualifier attached somewhere? Whbjr (talk) 21:18, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

What happened to Byrd?
Harry Byrd was put on the infobox for a little while and then suddenly removed. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xdude gamer (talk • contribs) 19:21, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

I think “unpledged electors (Harry Byrd)” should be added, or something similar. PeacockShah (talk) 21:08, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

He should be put there because he got electoral votes. He got more electoral votes then Walter Mondale Bearbear99i (talk) 19:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Unless you want to add each individual who received electoral votes in lieu of Greeley in 1872 then I would say there's precedent not to include Byrd. Codename Jenny V (talk) 00:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Strongly disagree. First, the consensus across all the articles is to include only candidates that got more than 5% of the popular vote. Second, to include Byrd and not Nader and Johnson and others that had an actual effect on an election is ridiculous. Third, this is indulging a legal fiction that the president is chosen by the college and not by the people. If we're going to do that, then the date of every election should be set at when the electoral college meets, all references to the popular vote or to the margins of victory in each state should be removed, and the articles should make it seem like the electors vote for whoever they want and that's how the president is chosen. Even though this clearly doesn't reflect reality. Also, the 2016 page would include Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul and John Kasich but not Gary Johnson, which is absurd. 1.145.240.249 (talk) 05:37, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * You say "the consensus across all the articles is to include only candidates that got more than 5% of the popular vote." This would be a great criterion.  Do you have a reference for this? Dan Bloch (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elections_and_Referendums/Archive_12#RfC_on_5%_threshold 1.145.240.249 (talk) 10:57, 16 October 2022 (UTC)


 * There is no source under the dixiecrat tag, the only thing i can find of him running as "dixiecrat" whatever that means in *this* context (since the party only offically was a thing in 1948) is a collage thesis. Kedokinnie (talk) 02:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Campaign Events - Verification of Bribery of Churches
This paragraph is at the end of this section:
 * "Nixon's inability to carry the African-American vote was another of many missteps in his campaign. Eisenhower had scored 40% of black votes four years earlier, and Nixon assumed he would perform as well with his strong support of civil rights. However, several missteps including the Lodge "pledge" and Nixon's refusal to comment on Martin Luther King Jr.'s arrest in Atlanta harmed his support with black voters. In addition to that, the Kennedy campaign drenched black churches with "soap" (bribe money) to buy votes. Attempts by the Nixon campaign to counter this were not very successful as they were out-spent three to one. Ultimately, Nixon won under 25% of the black vote on Election Day and strong black turnout for Kennedy in several important states including Illinois and South Carolina may have contributed to his defeat."

While I've often heard this charge, I've never seen documentation of this, and I'm surprised the paragraph has been accepted without documentation. That being outspent three to one is referenced makes it sound as though facts exist somewhere, although I've never found them.

Does anyone know the source of this claim, and can it be referenced? kbachler (talk) 03:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * This was added in the "00:07, 14 March 2023‎" edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_United_States_presidential_election&diff=1144479575&oldid=1143082444 by a user at IP address 70.44.223.30. (That address has numerous complaints of unsourced edits.) My moderate search for references to the "soap (bribe money)" claim failed to find anything. That edit also introduced the unreferenced statement about Mazo's finding of "six ballots at once", etc. Steven Alexander 17:12, 28 June 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevena (talk • contribs)

Who were the third party nominees?
There's no information on the page about the Communist, Reform, or other parties' nominees. Barking Hog (talk) 03:57, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Reform didn't exist yet The-J-Verse (talk) 14:13, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Change the Images
I think that we should change the images to color ones. For Kennedy there is a precedent for 1st term images of the president as shown in elections such as 1968, 1976, 1980, 2000, 2016, 2020. For Nixon the portrait has been made in 1959, though his current portrait was made during a time between 1953-1961 meaning it could be even more inaccurate. I think we should put this up for a vote to decide. I vote Color.

New Images: Sussyfist69 (talk) 18:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I submit a vote to keep the current B&W images ~ HistorianL (talk) 19:18, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * To be honest the Nixon photo could be better but it is still better than the B&W one so I vote
 * for the color option but a better Nixon portrait should be found. IlikeIke12 (talk) 23:01, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

The Vote has ended and it has been decided that the color images have won in a 2-1 vote — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sussyfist69 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * B&W is better here. Binksternet (talk) 05:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You rigged the vote Qutlooker (talk) 03:56, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Can we change the photos back to black and white?
The new Nixon photo is cropped very weirdly, and the black and white ones were perfectly fine. I have no idea why there's a wave of people changing fine black and white photos to awful color ones Codename Jenny V (talk) 23:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Second Image Vote
New Images: I found a better Nixon Image and so I vote Color, vote will conclude on the 24th. Sussyfist69 (talk) 22:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I vote to keep the black and white images. S maps (talk) 02:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I vote B & W. Just because a color image exists doesn’t mean it’s got to be used, if that was the case there would be color images going back to 1944, but ain’t, because the color images aren’t that great. Qutlooker (talk) 05:31, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I vote color — the proposed photos look great, and I’m of the opinion that color images should be used whenever possible. I see no reason not to change it. DrOwl19 (talk) 02:15, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem is with MS and AL, where are we gonna find a Color image for Harry Byrd? Qutlooker (talk) 14:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That Like saying we can't have color images for 1972 because we don't have a color portrait for John Schmitz. So it's obviously better to use color for this.  73.194.5.107 (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I’d say otherwise, especially after the fact that George McGovern’s portrait got changed a bunch of times, so no. I say no. Qutlooker (talk) 04:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * What the hell are you even saying? Are you seriously saying that 1972 should be B&W. 73.194.5.107 (talk) 15:39, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No, I'm saying just because there is a color portrait of the person, doesn't mean we should use them. Thats what I'm saying Qutlooker (talk) 23:10, 22 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep B&W. Binksternet (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Change to '''Color ConquerHead (talk) 02:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Idk if you Vote is gonna since it was on the 24, I digress. Qutlooker (talk) 03:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I’m going to count the vote just cause if we don’t then it will tie and we have to do this shit all over again and if you try to dispute this I will keep on changing it cause if you are so stubborn you can’t accept a vote 2 hours late because we will have to do this again. If you attempt to call for a revote I will report and change the page back as it is obvious you are trying to push your own view, so the vote has concluded 4-3 in favor of color. Sussyfist69 (talk) 13:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Is all I have to say Qutlooker (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * And oh, YOU ARE RIGGING THE VOTE, YOU VOTED FOR YOURSELF. SO DON'T SAY IT WASN'T RIGGED, IT WAS, AND IS A TIE. I'll Count ConquerHead's vote, but not yours. And to me, stop being so defensive about something so little, it's just an Image, nothing else. Qutlooker (talk) 15:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Bro what the hell do you mean I voted for myself? Sussyfist69 (talk) 16:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)


 * CU note I don't have the mental energy to parse what to strike above, and what to leave. Suffice it to say that, and  (who !voted in the discussion on this same subject back June) in are all the same person.  Girth Summit  (blether)  19:46, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Election fraud
There is no citation for this Nixon quote in the contorversies section: "every pipsqueak politician down there would start claiming fraud when he lost an election" about not challenging the results. This does not show up in searches for various keywords in Nixon's memoirs. Some pages were not available online but a page number for the printed book would be useful. Colonial Computer 16:14, 23 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22yearswothanks (talk • contribs)

Consensus on Byrd?
Can we please take a vote on if Byrd should be included or not instead of having an edit war over this? River10000 (talk) 18:45, 8 September 2023 (UTC)