I know this rule came into place after Roosevelt's time, but I feel in a way that a president should run for more than 2 terms. If he is a bad president then its the peoples fault for electing him, I'm not saying I fully think a president should run for more than 2 terms however.
I don't think we should have a president for more than two terms, due to the fact that any more than two terms people will start to get angry. Not only that but they think he is okay for another term and then it seems like a dictatorship for the poeple of our country that didn't vote for them. A leader like FDR is far from our reach with all the **** holes in politics today.
blaming the voters is making the assumption that all voters know anything about politics.Hewkii
Are you saying democracy is inherently flawed? Does this mean elections therefor mean nothing, and are the result of mass manipulation and propoganda spending, and nothing more? Then would you favor the removal of a free voting system, and put in replacement a full republic system, or an Empire?
I don't think we should have a president for more than two terms, due to the fact that any more than two terms people will start to get angry. Not only that but they think he is okay for another term and then it seems like a dictatorship for the poeple of our country that didn't vote for them. A leader like FDR is far from our reach with all the **** holes in politics today.
W3Z3C
There are always aholes in politics, doesnt matter what decade.
If times are hard and the President is a good President, then sure. If not, then no.
If times are like a great depression, and the leader was like FDR then sure. If not, then no.
Oleg_Huzwog
If you allow a "good" President to run for more than 2 terms, you must do the same for a "bad" one.
But after two terms shouldnt the people have learned by then that the guy runnign is bad for the country? Or am I being too optimistic about peoples ability to use logic?
But after two terms shouldnt the people have learned by then that the guy runnign is bad for the country? Or am I being too optimistic about peoples ability to use logic? Film-Guy
You are most definitely being too optimistic. If Congressional seats are to serve as any indicator, the longer a candidate holds office, the less likely they are to be ousted no matter how crummy a job they do.
People could elect Bush again if that happens. Matt-4542
You're right; they certainly could. And you must be willing to accept that possibility if you are to endorse the thought of allowing any President to run for more than 2 terms. You can't place a qualifier of "only good Presidents are able to do this" because there is no objective means of measuring how good or bad a candidate is.
[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"][QUOTE="Matt-4542"]So youre saying since FDR served 3, you wouldnt mind Bush serving 3? BS. Matt-4542
Uh... what? The topic says "run", not "elect".
People could elect Bush again if that happens. I understand where your coming from, but that kind of bias is what plants seeds of doubt in countries. In intrest of fairness the bad president has to have the same oppurtunities as the good ones.
[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="honkyjoe"]No..thats how countrties become DictatorshipsMoroes
this
you two do know, that for the majority of time the US has existed, there was no limit on terms, right? We never got a dictator then, why would we now?
Theres a first for everything. Hiding behind "Its always been like this" won't get us anywhere. Anything can happen. Never say never.You just did :lol:
Log in to comment