role the rights issue in the 1960 presidential election was investigated through a survey the voting intentions 130 Negroes and 147 whites in a southern city. rights issue proved to be central importance in the decisions the Negro voters. white on the other hand, tended to make their decisions on other grounds, and the rights issue played a much lesser role. This was due not to indifference toward the issue but rather to the belief that the stands Nixon and Kennedy were equally unacceptable. Thus Kennedy was able to attract a majority Negro voters by adopting a somewhat more militant stance than his opponent on rights without alienating a large number southern whites, who tended to regard any differences between the candidates on rights as insignificant. O S NE OF THE major issues recent presidential election campaigns in the United States has been the question rights for Negroes. Yet, in spite the great importance attached to the issue by the candidates in the conduct their campaigns, the impact the issue upon the voting decisions the public has not generally been studied except in indirect fashion, primarily through the analysis gross voting returns. Thus we have little knowledge the specific effects the rights issue as distinct from other issues with regard to the voting patterns either Negroes or whites. There have been many studies Negro presidential voting based primarily upon the analysis voting returns in predominantly Negro wards and precincts in southern and northern cities.' These studies show that until 1936 Negroes in the United States tended to vote Republican as a kind perpetual monument to Reconstruction. New Deal economic and welfare measures, however, tended to attract Negroes to the Democratic party in the elections between 1936 and 1952. In 1956 there were widespread defections back to the Republican Party. According to Lubell's study 86 cities, Eisenhower received only 25 percent the Negro vote in these cities in 1952 but received 36 percent in 1956.2 change was especially great in the southern cities, where the percent voting for Eisenhower rose from 19 percent in 1952 to 47 percent in 1956. A Gallup poll in January 1957, showed that of all the major groups the nation's population, the one that shifted most to the Eisenhower-Nixon ticket... was the Negro voter.3 reason for the shift the Negro vote in 1956 has been the subject much speculation. Moon believes that civil rights was most certainly an important consideration in the minds Negro voters, and he points out that their switch was most pronounced in the South, where the issue was sharp and inescapable.4 Lubell states that ... . the crucial struggle in the minds Negroes during the last campaign was the conflict between their anger over incidents racial violence in the South and the economic attachment that they felt to the Democratic party.'5 Where unemployment was heavy and where Negroes were relatively well integrated into the labor movement, as in Michigan and Toledo, there were few defections from the * Paper read at the twenty-fourth annual meeting the Southern Sociological Society, Miami Beach, Florida, April 1961. I am indebted to the Research Council Florida State University for financial support this study and to Charles U. Smith Florida A. & M. University for his co-operation and assistance during the field survey phase the study. 1 See Elston Roady, The Negro's Role in Southern Politics, Negro in American Society (Tallahassee: Florida State University Studies, no. 28, 1958); Hugh D. Price, Negro and Southern Politics (New York: New York University Press, 1957); Margaret Price, Negro Voter in the South (Atlanta: Southern Regional Council, 1957); and the numerous articles in the Journal Negro Education, 26 (Summer 1957). 2 Samuel Lubell, The Future the Negro Voter in the United States, Journal Negro Education, 26 (Summer 1957), pp. 408-417. 3 Henry Lee Moon, The Negro Vote in the Presidential Election 1956, Journal Negro Education, 26 (Summer 1957), pp. 219-230. 4 Ibid. p. 226. 5 Lubell, op. cit., p. 408. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.208 on Fri, 14 Oct 2016 04:22:55 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms