Should 2 term president be able to run again. (after a one term out of office)

Epidemic · July 24th, 2003, 03:09 PM

It would seem only fair since incumbant status would be removed.

If the president is good enough to get elected after the time off I think that the people have spoken.

jon112981 · July 24th, 2003, 03:18 PM

I'm sure that will happen right after we force a uniform standard for voting on all the states. *sarcasm captioning for the sarcasm impared* In theory it actually sounds like a decent idea. The key is to make sure he incumbant status is removed from him. I'd say make it 3 terms just to be safe. The current president could have justdone such a bad job that people would re-elect him still based on the incumbant status. By him I mean him/her because a female president is possible I'm just lazy in typing.

Theophylact · July 24th, 2003, 03:25 PM

I always thought the 22nd Amendment was a dumb idea, and I still do. Same with term limitations for other elected officials.

Virginia's one-term limit on its Governor means that from his first day in office, he's preparing to run for Senator.

Epidemic · July 24th, 2003, 03:29 PM

I like the idea of the sebatical (spelling?)

There is a certain amount of incumbent advantage which might end up giving too much power. But should clinton be able to run again in 2004. I say yes. Hope he would lose but yes.

ShawnD1 · July 24th, 2003, 04:47 PM

I don't like this rule either. Like theo said, they start planning for jobs that they don't currently have. Another thing is that for their second term, they are no longer responsible for their actions. Make some bad laws? Who cares, can't be re-elected anyway. Start a war? Who cares, gonna be fired at the end of the term anyway.

vass0922 · July 24th, 2003, 06:14 PM

So instead they have it on easy street basking in the glory of Incumbent status?
Name recognition is a powerful thing
"Oh yeah I've heard of him, I'll just vote for him"
"I've been voting on him for 20 years, I'll just keep going"

I think the term limit is important to kill the lazy voters.
I do think they should be able to re-run though .. if they were a good president then they should be allowed in again.

Chuckiechan · July 24th, 2003, 06:38 PM

I think the founding mothers and fathers (being politically correct here) were against it because they came from contries ruled by kings and queens.

It would give a president and his party too much time to consolidate and concentrate power. Look at multi term senators and congressmen. They don't give two $hits about their constituents, only about there compagn contributers.

It seems that the perks of the presidency are hard to leave behind! Bill isn't the first one to suggest it.

Highlife Man · July 24th, 2003, 06:48 PM

Allowing a president back into office after a 1-term break is an interesting idea that certainly has Clinton supporters tingling with glee and Clinton bashers frothing at the mouth!

SeanC · July 24th, 2003, 07:47 PM

To bring Clinton back in would be great. It would also mean Bush could get back in later as well though, not so great.

Sean

MTAtech · July 24th, 2003, 08:43 PM

It is an unneccessary limitation which will require 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of the states to change. It's not going to happen any time soon.

The 22nd Amendment sort of backfired on the Republicans. The amendment was pushed through because Roosevelt had 4 terms. Little did they know, Ike would soon be elected who could have won a third term.