Should Presidential Term Limits be Removed?

[Pfeff]

I actually think she can already do that. No one stopped Hillary Clinton from running. (other then the fact that she lost to Obama in the Primaries). And we've already had plenty of other presidents with family connections to others including children of former presidents.

Completely different...name 1 other person who ran for President that had family ties to a former President and exactly 0 experience being an elected official. Go ahead, we'll wait

[The Penguin]

Correct, one president has ever had more than 2 terms. Afterwords the party that didn't like him came to power and passed the 22nd Amendment.

---------- Post added 2013-01-07 at 11:49 PM ----------



So you didn't actually answer the question about where Obama hasn't compromised? Instead you went off in a rant about how no one is allowed to criticize blatantly incorrect statements that you make? Fabulous.

The nice thing about the Judicial branch is a Judge can very bluntly say "Answer the Question" and the person has to. They cant slither through it, they cant drag out the clock in a filibuster, they answer the question.


If you read back through my points, I simply said that I wasn't going to debate it in a thread on term limits because I feel that instead of you answering the question your trying to shunt it away from that to cover for Obama's varied errors. You want to talk about the topic in another thread, be my guest. But I am not going off topic when I see both parties dodge and change the subjects they dislike. Both are power hungry. Both should IMHO be disbanded.


The Debt he and George Bush created is my reason I feel both were lousy Presidents and failures. Obama just gets three years to prove it wrong and redeem himself. Frankly I hope he does, but I wont hold my breath. I wasn't when Bush was in office either. Or when Clinton was around, or for the prior Bush. Think the last President I did like was Reagan, and that was for his candor and sensibility, even if I wasn't fond of all of Reaganomics. Carter tried. He actually reminds me a lot of Obama though. He tried, but he isn't succeeding.


You can disagree but it wont change my opinion that rabid support of either party is bad news for this Country. It is pretty funny to see you turn it into a attack based on the fact that I completely dislike the way the country is headed. It's also pretty funny how because I'm not head over heels in love with Obama, you somehow think your going to convince me to let you put me on trial for my beliefs, in some misguided effort to make me change talking points to something unrelated to this thread.

I learned a long time ago that when your talking about a Political Candidate / Party / Etc., the only way you'll get anywhere is to tunnel vision when talking politics as otherwise you waste your time with things that are unrelated to the true problems. The minute the slightest dissent is shown, everything but the problem will be brought up, and the other side will try their damnedest to demonize you in the process to shut you down.


Time wasting is in my estimate the biggest error our Government has allowed. Term Limits will restore that sense of urgency, instead of kicking things back to the Senate or the House.

[Roose]

No. Oh lord no. We no longer have politicians worthy of more than 2 terms. Just imagine 12-16 years of Bush or Obama. Fuck that noise.

[obdigore]

Actually I simply said that I wasn't going to debate it in a thread on term limits because I feel that instead of you answering the question your trying to shunt it away from that to cover for Obama's varied errors. You want to talk about the topic in another thread, be my guest. But I am not going off topic when I see both parties dodge and change the subjects they dislike. Both are power hungry. Both should imho be disbanded.


The Debt he and George Bush created is my reason I feel both were lousy Presidents and failures. Obama just gets three years to prove it wrong and redeem himself. Frankly I hope he does, but I wont hold my breath.

You can disagree but it wont change my opinion that rabid support of either party is bad news for this Country. It is pretty funny to see you turn it into a attack based on the fact that I completely dislike the way the country is headed. It's also pretty funny how because I'm not head over heels in love with Obama, you somehow think your going to convince me to let you put me on trial for my beliefs, in some misguided effort to make me change talking points to something unrelated to this thread. I've just learned to tunnel vision when I talk politics as otherwise you waste your time with things that are unrelated to the true problems.


Time wasting is in my estimate the biggest error our Government has allowed. Term Limits will restore that sense of urgency, instead of kicking things back to the Senate or the House.

You stated that Obama refused to compromise on anything. I said you are wrong and I want you to back that up. You keep going off into long winded rants about how you don't want to go off topic when you literally brought it up.

Term Limits wont add any kind of sense of urgency. It will just be more party loyalty because you will need the party even more to get elected once.

[Daedius]

No - having no limit would give people the capability of abusing the system to stay in their position.

[Roose]

While I don't really support Obama, I am curious as to why he's a failure, and specific instances on where he hadn't compromised. I hear conflicting reports on a lot of issues, so I'm not sure who to believe.

He is keeping Guantanamo Bay open. He is increasing the drone attacks. Still in Iraq/Afghanistan. He is all for invading privacy. He has historically been against even medical marijuana. He elects cabinet members that are just as bad as Bush. He is a puppet.

[Valexie]

Correct, one president has ever had more than 2 terms. Afterwords the party that didn't like him came to power and passed the 22nd Amendment.

This is correct, but people tend to forget why they did it. Franklin Roosevelt did overstep the Constitution on more then one occasion, the primary reason for term limits is to prevent corruption. Your notice we have term limits right now even in Congress the problem is that the majority who we keep voting in we're grandfathered in, and thus exempt from the limits.

Personally, I think the limits should be as followed : Congress - 4 Years (1 Term), President - 4 Years (Per term, Max 2), Supreme Court - 8 Years (2 Terms)

[obdigore]

This is correct, but people tend to forget why they did it. Franklin Roosevelt did overstep the Constitution on more then one occasion, the primary reason for term limits is to prevent corruption. Your notice we have term limits right now even in Congress the problem is that the majority who we keep voting in we're grandfathered in, and thus exempt from the limits.

Personally, I think the limits should be as followed : Congress - 4 Years (1 Term), President - 4 Years (Per term, Max 2), Supreme Court - 8 Years (2 Terms)

There are no term limits in Federal Congressional posts. Your State mileage may vary.

[ElAmigo]

Then why didn't the framers throw in that 22nd amendment? Oh wait, because they wanted the option open and that was George Washingtons personal opinion.

I don't understand why so many people seem to think every single thing the Framers did was correct and perfect in every way. They allowed slavery. They didn't allow anyone what wasn't a monied white male to vote. Some of them were ok with forcing you to pay a tax if you didn't want to go to church every Sunday. The fact that people treat these fallible humans as near dieties is absolutely shocking to me. It is bordering on ancestor worship.

totally agree

Infracted.

Post more than just "totally agree" etc.

[Tojara]

Your last good president was Clinton, in recent memory I think he is the only one (had there not been a restriction) that could have won a third term in recent generations anyway.

There are advantages and disadvantages to having term limits. The mid 90s in both the U.S and Canada were great and I am a firm believer that if things really are going well why change them just for the sake of changing them? The downside to having no term limits though (at least in the U.S) is that a lot of your presidency is going to be boggled down in a long election season instead of doing the job you're suppose to be doing. Most presidents have a far better second term than they do with a first term because they no longer have to worry about re-election, and in my eyes this is one of the better things about term limits. It's a shitty way to look at it because honestly they should be doing the best of their abilities in both potential terms, but in reality this is usually never the case.

The first four years under Clinton weren't amazing, but they weren't awful either. During his second term though things were really great. Not saying it wouldn't happen but if he had to worry about a third possible election that second term might have ended up being worse than what we remember it being.

If anything I think you should look at term limits for congress. That place is fucking awful.

[Seranthor]

Even if this did pass Congress and the President signed it, you'd need ratification from the states, would you not?

Yes you would need 38 states to ratify it as well.

and that.. could take years and years.

[Ryuukon]

No a thousand times over. You remove term limits and we become a potential monarchy in the United States. On top of that, the last thing this country needs is even the possibility of a 3rd term under Barack Obama.

Yes, because Obama has been doing such a TERRIBLE job, and Romney would have made everything right with the American world. Is that what you were pushing at?

If so, Obama would never have gotten a second term. Despite you not agreeing with him.

Though I'm guessing you like the GOP. Now let's look at Congress...

Um.... yeah....

[The Penguin]

Tax Cuts. So thus I've already proven myself right.


Wait, now you'll probably want to turn it into a debate on Taxes. Here's my answer. I wont be here to read it. I'm done on this thread as I've said what I felt was right and the Liberals are all frothy with indignation same way the Conservatives get over other issues. Because I disagree with their champion, I must be of the other side. Heaven forbid that free-thought exist.


One of the big things most people of this country I've talked to over the years like are checks on their leaders power. One of the great things about George Washington was that unlike say Julius Ceasar, he could of had power. He discharged his power which is the reverse of human nature. To me, I can only chuckle that a Democrat wanted to change the Law. I chuckle in the same way I would if a Republican wanted to do it with Bush or Romney in the House. I'll lay odds the Representative wouldnt of suggested it if Romney had won, and that ultimately is why I feel Single Term for all of these jokers would be a good thing.


Everyone is grabbing for power in Washington DC these days. If someone was smart then they'd consider the bigger problem and ensure that no party ever can become such a monopoly again. Everyone always wants to tip-toe around the core issues. It's revolting. Man up and discuss the real problems while you have the time to debate them. Make every minute you are in office count I say. Dont play at guess the smell or hold hostage every bill the other side sends your way like our Speaker and Mr. Reid seem to do.

At the risk of sounding like ole Nozdormu. Wasting time. Precious, Precious time.

[obdigore]

Tax Cuts. So thus I've already proven myself right.

Is this about Obama not compromising? And how he did compromise on the tax cuts? Or are you just talking shit again?

Wait, now you'll probably want to turn it into a debate on Taxes. Here's my answer. I wont be here to read it. I'm done on this thread as I've said what I felt was right and the Liberals are all frothy with indignation same way the Conservatives get over other issues.

Actually, I enjoy when everyone is using facts instead of guesstimation and lies.

One of the big things most people of this country I've talked to over the years like are checks on their leaders power. One of the great things about George Washington was that unlike say Julius Ceasar, he could of had power. He discharged his power which is the reverse of human nature. To me, I can only chuckle that a Democrat wanted to change the Law. I chuckle in the same way I would if a Republican wanted to do it with Bush or Romney in the House. I'll lay odds the Representative wouldnt of suggested it if Romney had won, and that ultimately is why I feel Single Term for all of these jokers would be a good thing.

Actually, this same guy (Rep Serrano) has proposed this every odd year since 1997

Everyone is grabbing for power in Washington DC these days. If someone was smart then they'd consider the bigger problem and ensure that no party ever can become such a monopoly again. Everyone always wants to tip-toe around the core issues. It's revolting. I'm done on this thread as I've made all my points pretty well I think. Man up and discuss the real problems I say. Dont play at guess the smell.

Yes points basted in opinion and lacking of fact, which is where I've been taking exception with your statements.

[Collegeguy]

If someone came at an early enough age, why not? If someone's demonstrated their love for the country well enough to convince the nation, why not?

It's not saying that the president must be from outside the US, just allowing the possibility for an exceptional case.

President being born in the United States is to degrade the possibility of foreign abuse, corruption, and exploitation. For example, you can look at such a case as President Fujimori of Peru where he ran to Japan to avoid heavy corruption charges. Although in his case it didn't prevent it, the after effect is still sound.