John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States of America, was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963, exactly 55 years ago. While Lee Harvey Oswald was blamed, there are still doubts as to who the assassin was. Kennedy — only 46 years old at the time of his death — was very popular all over the world, even if only because of the image of a young family in the White House.

Up to now, John F Kennedy was the only Roman Catholic to serve as president of the USA. This was a big issue in the 1960 election campaign as 80 per cent of the US population is not Roman Catholic. But with 20 per cent of the US population, the Roman Catholic Church has the largest following in the US. Kennedy received a very huge share of the Roman Catholic vote.

In his book, The making of the president 1960, Theodore H White gives two main reasons the Democrat John Kennedy clinched the 1960 US presidential elections over the Republican Richard Nixon, then US vice-president. One was the first-ever presidential debates on television that took place that year. Kennedy, with make-up on his face, looked young and fresh on TV. (Using make-up on TV was then a novelty.) But Nixon looked older, was very tired and he was reportedly under physical pain as a door had been accidentally slammed on his foot during the campaign as his motorcade moved swiftly from one place to another. His appearance on TV during the debate turned off many female voters.

From that time on, TV debates between rivals for the leadership of countries became a custom. Since that time, we have had such media events in Jamaica, except when a rival declines to appear. This happened in 1976 when Edward Seaga did not show up, in 1980 when none was planned, in 1989 when Michael Manley declined the invitation, and in 2016 when Portia Simpson Miller refused to debate.

It is my opinion, however, that while the debates generate more viewership among voters — which brings in revenue by way of advertisements to the media houses — debates do not influence election results in Jamaica. While debates do, in fact, influence elections elsewhere, perhaps especially in the USA, elections in Jamaica are won on election day.

Opinion pollsters claim that American women pay great attention to appearances of the candidates during elections, especially in terms of perceived handsomeness in addition to clothing. While Donald Trump is not seen as being comely, his arch-rival was a woman, Hilary Clinton. Yes, Hilary Clinton got the popular vote, but a majority of the American women voted for Trump.

The second reason that White gives for Kennedy’s victory in 1960 was his response to the arrest of Martin Luther King Jr that year. Kennedy phoned Coretta Scott King to sympathise with her after her husband’s arrest. When that simple act went public, it swung the African American vote behind Kennedy. Previously, the African Americans were ‘Lincoln-Republicans’, because Abraham Lincoln was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the US in 1863.

It has been said that Kennedy was responsible for reducing the habit of American men to wear hats in public. He was the first US president to appear in public without wearing a top hat and, as a result of that simple act, hat sales for men plummeted. Since that time, hat sales for men all over the world never returned to its previous levels.

Here in Jamaica, I do not know of any research into the voting pattern of the garment industry bosses in Jamaica in the 1970s and 1980s when many Jamaican men followed Michael Manley in wearing kareba suits. I imagine they were quite pleased when the Jamaica Labour Party won power in 1980 and Edward Seaga became prime minister, who insisted that ministers of government wear suits. And more so when Michael Manley and the People’s National Party returned to power in 1989 and wore suits as did most of the Cabinet.

Would the issue of suits versus karebas influence the way in which garment industry bosses contributed to the political parties in subsequent election campaigns in Jamaica? Did Kennedy’s decline to wear hats in public affect the contributions to the party coffers of both Republicans and Democrats in the USA? I know of no research on the subject in either Jamaica or the USA.

Perhaps Kennedy’s greatest contribution to Jamaica was in 1961 when he approved a grant of funds to build the western Kingston housing scheme, commonly known as Tivoli Gardens. At the time of the bulldozing of “Back-o-Wall” in 1966, Norman Manley, then Opposition leader, in a radio broadcast, stated that while he was premier of Jamaica he secured the funds for the housing scheme from Kennedy. I have never heard that anyone has ever refuted those words.

The approved funds were distributed five years later in 1966. By that time Kennedy was dead, Lyndon Johnson was US president, the Jamaica Labour Party was in power, Alexander Bustamante was prime minister, though ailing, and Edward Seaga was minister of development and welfare. If what Norman Manley said was correct, then the photograph of himself and Kennedy in the White House in 1961 may have been taken when he was securing the funds for the housing scheme known as Tivoli Gardens since 1966.

And that 1961 photograph of Norman Manley and Kennedy came up in a discussion — in which I participated — about Norman Manley’s complexion. I have said and written that Norman Manley was a brown man, unlike his first cousin Sir Alexander Bustamante, and unlike his sons Douglas and Michael, whose complexions were akin to their mother Edna Manley. A participant in the discussion, Jamaro Campbell, downloaded the Norman Manley-John Kennedy photo from the Internet, made the comparison between the two men, and agreed with me. I suggest that anyone who has doubts as to Norman Manley’s true complexion should do the same.

Michael Burke is a research consultant, historian and current affairs analyst. Send comments to the Observer or ekrubm765@yahoo.com.