All eyes are on New Hampshire tonight. Democrats across the country know that this is the year for a great Democratic victory in this state.
We know of the tremendous gains which you have made, as the result of hard work and good candidates. We know that you rose from roughly 36% of the vote in 1952 to 46% of the vote in 1956. If I understand mathematics, you should get 56% of the vote in 1958!
There are many voters, I know – in this state and elsewhere – who are uncertain and confused tonight. Their votes for the last 15 or 20 years have gone – by habit and custom – to the Republican Party.
But when they see Republican leaders fighting among themselves – when they see the Republican administration ignoring their needs and their views – then they are uncertain, they are resentful and they are prepared to vote Democratic.
I would ask such voters to consider the recent past. I would ask them to observe how much better representation was obtained by the people of Maine when they finally elected a Democratic congressman – how much better administration was received by the people of Connecticut when they elected a Democratic Governor.
I would ask them also to consider the record of the more distant past – a record which demonstrates that there is in the long run no room in the Republican Party for the advocates of progressive legislation.
There was no room for George Norris when he was battling for REA, and political reform. There was no room in the Republican Party for Bob LaFollette when he battled the railroads and the monopolists and the exploiters of child labor. Even Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 could not stay in the Republican Party after it had sabotaged his conservation policies.
I offer these examples – and there are many others – to the disillusioned, discontented former Republican voters of New Hampshire and all across the nation. I offer these examples as a final reminder that there is no room in the Republican Party for the real friend of the worker, the housewife, and the independent businessman. I invite them to join the ranks of Democratic voters – to find a home here among friends who will share their concerns and do something about them. And I urge them to obtain for themselves some real representation by electing some good Democrats this November.
I would not attempt to tell the voters of another state their business. But it seems to me that there are two very special reasons why New Hampshire would want to send some Democrats back to Washington and to your State Capitol as well.
The first reason is that New Hampshire will want to share in the Democratic sweep of 1958. There can be no doubt about it – victory is in the air – the handwriting is on the wall – this is going to be the greatest Democratic year since 1936.
In short, the Congressional policies that shape the future of this state will be shaped largely in the councils of the Democratic Party. New Hampshire is a long way from Washington. You do not want the fate of your mills, your jobs, your farms and all your other problems to be decided by those unfamiliar with your needs. You want to have a voice in those Democratic councils. That is one reason I am confident that New Hampshire will see the wisdom of sending some Democrats back to Washington.
But there is another even more basic reason. 1958 represents New Hampshire’s best opportunity to cast off permanently the confining shackles of one-party rule.
I know something about one-party states: I would not want to live in one. For Some three generations prior to 1928, Massachusetts was solidly, permanently Republican, just as New Hampshire and Vermont have been, and just as Maine was until 1954.
So all New England well knows the deteriorating influence of one-party government. The party in power becomes lazy, inefficient and ineffective. It looks upon the state as its private property. It looks upon voters as a necessary nuisance. Victory after victory makes that party’s leaders smug and contented, insensitive to the real problems of the state and its people.
At the same time – let us face it frankly – the minority party in a one-party state also suffers. Younger leaders are discouraged. National candidates and administrations of both parties ignore the one-party state and its problems. The one- party states in New England – your state today, my state a generation ago – have suffered all of these in the past – suffered from a lack of attention at home and in Washington, from a lack of new ideas and new leadership. Our states suffered – and so did the ideals of democracy.
But you who are here tonight are demonstrating that New Hampshire is on its way to becoming a real two-party state again. This means, as we have seen in Massachusetts and Maine, that from now on the voters of this state will be offered a real choice of candidates and programs.
Its young people will be interested in political activity. The entire state, and both parties in it, will become more alert, more alive and more productive than ever before.
The election of Democratic candidates here in November will be a striking testimonial by the voters of New Hampshire to the values of a real two-party system.
I would remind these new recruits to the Democratic cause of one great historical truth – that in the most critical periods of our nation’s history, the Democratic Party has come through with competent, courageous, responsible leadership.
I was sharply reminded of this Democratic tradition on another Saturday night earlier this year. I was in New York to see the opening of a play about Franklin Roosevelt called "Sunrise at Campobello."
It is not a play about politics. It is not about the Presidency or the Democratic Party. It is a play about the triumph of one man and his family over disaster – the disaster of physical illness.
But I thought, as I left the theatre, that this play portrays more than this stirring persona triumph. It also brought to mind all the great qualities of leadership in times of crisis for which FDR was famous – not only the personal crisis of his paralysis, but the crisis of a chaotic economy, of a world at war, and all the rest.
We urgently need real leadership again in Washington today. For this nation now enters a period of crisis of greater proportion than any we have ever endured. We are confronted with a deepening crisis in world affairs, in our relations with our allies, in our prestige with the uncommitted nations, in our military, scientific, political and economic race with the Soviets. The Soviets have out shown us in scientific achievement. They have outmaneuvered us in trade and aid. They have outstripped us in the race for ultimate weapons and outer space. The Middle East, North Africa, Indonesia, Cyprus, Latin America – every part of the world is in flames or in ferment. The Republicans in 1956 may have cried "Peace, peace" – but there is no peace – no stable peace in the Middle East, in Southeast Asia, in North Africa and elsewhere. And what the Republicans did not tell us was that our position in the world – our security – our very hopes for survival could be drastically diminished without a single shot being fired.
We will only be deceiving ourselves if we attribute all of our troubles around the world to Communist agitators. There are Communists in Latin America, to be sure – but they are successful because they exploit our government’s neglect of our former good neighbors. There are provocateurs in Lebanon and Algeria, to be sure – but their strength results from the massive decline of our prestige in North Africa and the Middle East.
These crises are not new. The pots have been boiling for years in Latin America, North Africa, the Middle East, and all over the world. They have cried out for action, for decision, for leadership, but there has been no leadership, there has been no decision – only drift and postponement, vacillation and indecision.
I do not pretend to say that these were all easy decisions. They will require some new burdens, some unpopular actions, some breaks with the traditional policies of the past. But I trust that the Democratic Party, when it assumes responsibility, will not hesitate to act, whatever the sacrifice required.
Here at home, where they promised prosperity to match their peace, the economic situation also remains stagnant. More than five million workers are unemployed. Millions of others are working only a few days a week. This month, hundreds of thousands of college and high school graduates will be walking the streets looking for work. And yet the cost of living continues to break all records.
Indeed, since the end of World War II, we have never had so deep a recession – we have never had so high an inflation – and we have never had so much recession and so much inflation at the very same time.
We may still prevent a complete economic disaster – but only if we can obtain effective, imaginary, tireless leadership. That kind of leadership is sorely lacking in this Administration.
We need something more in the way of leadership than those who talk blithely of a "breather" in the economy … or those who say everything will get better if we wait until the end of the year … or those who say reassuringly with Vice President Nixon: "There is nothing wrong with the economy that a good dose of confidence won’t cure," and "It’s time to quit running America down." Well, my friends – we here in New England say it’s time to start building America up.
Contrast, for example, Franklin Roosevelt’s vigorous attack on the depression in 1933 with the current Republican response to the slump. In 1933, the same kind of contrast was offered between the hesitant, moribund, outgoing Republican administration and the new, dynamic drive of the New Deal.
And as the Republicans packed to move out, Robert E. Sherwood contrasted the old and the new administrations in a brief, sardonic poem:
"Plodding feet
Tramp – tramp
The Grand Old Party’s
Breaking Camp.
Blare of bugles
Din – din
The New Deal is moving in."
What we need in America today is not so much confidence in the economy, but confidence in our leadership.
We were told when the recession increased in January to wait for the upturn in March. We waited – March arrived – and our confidence was diminished further. We see no new ideas, no bold action, no "blare of bugles." We see only "plodding feet tramp, tramp" … and "the Grand Old Party … breaking camp."
When an Administration lets fall the reins of leadership, they must be firmly held by the Congress – today a Democratic Congress. We must exercise that leadership.
We must pass measures effectively assisting our unemployed workers and our labor surplus areas.
We must restore the vitality of our anti-recession weapons – minimum wages, social security, jobless insurance.
We must restore the purchasing power of our consumers, and our small businessmen.
We must build the public works our nation needs – schools, homes, hospitals, urban renewal projects.
We must raise the nation’s standard of living instead of the cost of living – for the aged and the handicapped, for the unorganized and the underpaid and the underprivileged.
And above all, in the words of Justice Holmes, whether we sail with the wind or against the wind, let us set sail – and not drift or lie at anchor.
Here in New England, the oldest section of the country, we are particularly affected by this drift and lack of leadership. Our small businessmen and small farmers, our textile and fish industries, our one-industry cities and unharnessed rivers – all of these problems were neglected during the 70 years after the Civil War that New England was ignored as a one-party area – and all of these need extra attention and vigorous effort today.
These are not partisan issues – we are not going to play politics where the good of New England is concerned. On the contrary, I have devoted my efforts in the New England Senators Conference to strengthening bi-partisan action on these issues.
But we do need action, not oratory. This spring manufacturing employment in New England is down by more than 150,000 jobs. You have lost some 6,000 factory and mill jobs here in New Hampshire alone – more than 1 out of every 14. The average production worker in your state and mine no longer works a full 40-hour week – and unemployment continues at a high pace.
We can’t fall back upon our natural resources, our coal mines or oil wells or abundance of water power. We simply do not have them. We cannot rely upon the stability of the industrial giants – or the advantages of cheap fuel, cheap labor, or cheap transportation costs. We simply do not have them.
This area, in short, needs leadership and attention – aid to our distressed areas and unemployed workers – relief for our hard-hit textile, shoe, fish and other industries – elimination of our rail freight rate differentials – the development of low-cost, competitive atomic power – expanded credit for our small businessmen – a better break for our farmers and housewives and working men and women.
I do not pretend to say that the future will always be easy under a Democratic administration. There will be crises, there will be problems. But I say it is the Democratic Party that has the enthusiasm and the determination and the new ideas necessary to meet those problems.
We can build the schools and the hospitals and the homes and the dams that our nation needs. We can wage unrelenting war against drought and poverty and illiteracy and illness and economic insecurity.
We can build, through strength and justice and realistic leadership, a lasting peace.
The hard, tough question is whether a free society – with its freedom of choice – its breadth of opportunity – its range of alternatives – can meet the single-minded advance of the Communists.
Can a nation organized and governed such as ours endure? That is the real question. Have we the nerve and the will? Have we got what it takes to carry through in an age where – as never before – our very survival is at stake – where we and the Russians have the power to destroy one-quarter of the earth’s population – a feat not accomplished since Cain slew Abel? Can we carry through in an age where we will witness not only new breakthroughs in weapons of destruction – but also a race for mastery of the sky and the rain, the ocean and the tides, the inside of the earth and the inside of men’s minds?
We travel today along a knife-edged path which requires leadership better equipped than any since Lincoln’s Day to make clear to our people the vast spectrum of our challenges.
In the words of Woodrow Wilson: "We must neither run with the crowd nor deride it – but seek sober counsel for it – and for ourselves."
—Candles
—Fellow Democrats of New Hampshire – as we face a dark and difficult future, we ask that you, too, bring candles to help illuminate our way.
Source: Papers of John F. Kennedy. Pre-Presidential Papers. Senate Files, Box 901, "Political speech, Manchester, New Hampshire, 7 June 1958." John F. Kennedy Presidential Library.