• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should US Presidents only serve one term?

What should the term limit for POTUS be?


  • Total voters
    34

Sarcogito

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 23, 2012
Messages
2,333
Reaction score
2,090
Location
SE Asia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I realize any actual change would require a change to the Constitution. But for the sake of discussion, and regardless of what you think about the current President, do you think there should be a change to the duration and number of terms a President should be able to serve?

While I do think 4 years is a little on the short side, I don’t think a President should be wasting any of his or her time running for reelection. I think a decent rule would be that the POTUS should serve a single 6-year term and no more.

What say you?
 
1st choice: Repeal the 22nd Amendment and replace it for a required physical for a president applying to run for re-election. A President may serve as many terms as he can be elected to as long as she or he is in good health.

2nd choice: If the above could not be accomplished politically, then I would support modifying the 22nd Amendment to allow a president to serve up to 3 terms.
 
Single six year term. I read somewhere that Clinton would've preferred a single six year term to two four year terms. He thought it would've been more productive without having to campaign.
 
I've said it loads of times. Repeal the 22nd Amendment. If the President is doing a crappy job, vote him out. If he is doing a good job, keep him. I am against term limits of any kind. Let the voters decide who stays in office or not.
 
I realize any actual change would require a change to the Constitution. But for the sake of discussion, and regardless of what you think about the current President, do you think there should be a change to the duration and number of terms a President should be able to serve?

While I do think 4 years is a little on the short side, I don’t think a President should be wasting any of his or her time running for reelection. I think a decent rule would be that the POTUS should serve a single 6-year term and no more.

What say you?

12-16 years and we have a deal. I want the American people to be left with no doubts as to who is responsible for what, when, where, and why, and the only way to do that is to have a term stretch out for over a decade.
 
Let the voters decide who stays in office or not.

Haven't the "voters" proven numerous times that they can't be trusted to do what's right?

I live in Delaware. Biden was re-elected so much it took a VP position to finally get him out of office.

Names like Kennedy, Thurmond, and Byrd should be enough to warrant term limits.

No good can come from having people running this country for multiple decades.

Corruption and abuse of power are too much for people to rise above when it becomes a lifetime career.

I fully support term limits.
 
12-16 years and we have a deal. I want the American people to be left with no doubts as to who is responsible for what, when, where, and why, and the only way to do that is to have a term stretch out for over a decade.

You'd support the idea of George W. Bush as president for 12-16 years?????????????

Good lord.......As much as I'd want to move south to a location where there's palm trees before I die, something of that nature might have me petitioning for Canadian citizenship.
 
Without serious election reforms and anti-corruption legislation it's all rather pointless, but assuming real reforms are also put in place, the terms should be increased to 6 years and no limit on the number of terms served. I would, however, impose term limits on Supreme Court appointees, 10 years max, and a review by Congress for another term or a new appointment by the current President made and voted on.
 
I realize any actual change would require a change to the Constitution. But for the sake of discussion, and regardless of what you think about the current President, do you think there should be a change to the duration and number of terms a President should be able to serve?

While I do think 4 years is a little on the short side, I don’t think a President should be wasting any of his or her time running for reelection. I think a decent rule would be that the POTUS should serve a single 6-year term and no more.

What say you?

I say keep it as it is. Personally I would like to see term limits for all elected political offices,career politicians are a bad thing. One senator should not be able to have more power than another senator nor should a congressman be allowed to have more power than another congressman. Also to ensure that politicians are not trying to carry any influence from switching offices there should be a mandatory 5 year break in between offices.We should also be allowed to allowed to recall our senators,congress as well as a national recall election for the president.
 
Last edited:
I realize any actual change would require a change to the Constitution. But for the sake of discussion, and regardless of what you think about the current President, do you think there should be a change to the duration and number of terms a President should be able to serve?

While I do think 4 years is a little on the short side, I don’t think a President should be wasting any of his or her time running for reelection. I think a decent rule would be that the POTUS should serve a single 6-year term and no more.

What say you?

Hmm - good question.

I think: regardless of how many terms he serves - we're going to have a lame-duck period and a period of high activity. . . I'm more concerned with Congress - more so that what they manage to do (if it's possitive) doesn't keep it's forward momentum and dies off quickly . . . it seems like 2 years sometimes is too long or too short. *sigh*

It would be nice if we could do a recall vote - say: give the president a 6 year term and if at year 4 we do a recall vote and we don't like him he can head out early. Having a say over being able to out them early (president and congress) might peak interest more in elections. Unlike right now where if you don't like him: no big deal - he'll be gone i just a few years anyway.

But is it worth it just to get more people to vote? No

So leave things like they are:
 
Haven't the "voters" proven numerous times that they can't be trusted to do what's right?

I live in Delaware. Biden was re-elected so much it took a VP position to finally get him out of office.

Names like Kennedy, Thurmond, and Byrd should be enough to warrant term limits.

No good can come from having people running this country for multiple decades.

Corruption and abuse of power are too much for people to rise above when it becomes a lifetime career.

I fully support term limits.

A good argument,IMO.

What we do need is for the people to take much more of an interest in politics.
We need campaign and campaign finance reform...in a big way.
What we have now is horrible.
House members should have a 4 year term, NOT 2 - its absurd , as it is now..!
 
One senator should not be able to have more power than another senator nor should a congressman be allowed to have more power than another congressman.

That is an excellent point.
 
i think two four year terms is about right. eight years is about all i can stand from one president whether i like him / her or not, and there's an option of kicking them out at the halfway point.
 
Having a mid-term re-election for the President is one of the ways that we separate the great Presidents from the good Presidents. Unfortunately George W. Bush gets to be in the historically great President's group.

That gives me heartburn.
 
This is the only instance of term limits that I support. The Presidency has grown in power so much since WWII, that we call him "The Leader of the Free World." IMO, that's too much power to hold for too long of a period of time. Especially without the input of the rest of the "Free World" that he is apparently the leader of.

I've considered if a 6 year term is OK, but I think it's best to have a referendum on his performance once in a while.
 
I realize any actual change would require a change to the Constitution. But for the sake of discussion, and regardless of what you think about the current President, do you think there should be a change to the duration and number of terms a President should be able to serve?

While I do think 4 years is a little on the short side, I don’t think a President should be wasting any of his or her time running for reelection. I think a decent rule would be that the POTUS should serve a single 6-year term and no more.

What say you?

I agree with your idea and it should also apply to the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives. I used to believe there should be "NO" term limits and that American people should have the freedom to keep a good representative in office as long as they wanted.

Unfortunately, I had to go back to the drawing board when I analyzed the facts on the ground.

***
2010 - In the House of Representatives, 87% of the incumbents who stood for election were re-elected. This is slightly below the historical trend over the last several decades, and lower than the re-election rate in 1994, 2006, and 2008:

House-570x236.jpg

In the Senate, 84% of the incumbents who stood for re-election were successful. Again, this is fairly consistent with the historical rate over the past forty years or so:

Senate-570x242.jpg

Incumbent Re-Election Rates In The 2010 Mid-Terms

***
Voters say they want to "Throw the Bums out," but not their representatives because of all the era-marked pork barrel bribes. Seeing human nature on display proves voters aren't capable of replacing bad representatives.

***
G.O.P. Questions Obama’s Travel Accounting
April 25, 2012
By PETER BAKER

As President Obama returned to Washington on Wednesday after a two-day tour of crucial battleground states, the Republican National Committee requested an investigation into whether he was using taxpayer money for what amounted to campaign events.

Republicans Say Obama's Trips Were Political, Not Official - NYTimes.com

***
Politicians spend too much time raising money for re-elections to office. They can say they are doing a good job for their constituents but look how much time is wasted on raising money and campaigning for re-elections.

***
Obama has held more re-election fundraisers than previous five Presidents combined as he visits key swing states on 'permanent campaign'
By Toby Harnden

Barack Obama has already held more re-election fundraising events than every elected president since Richard Nixon combined, according to figures to be published in a new book.

Obama is also the only president in the past 35 years to visit every electoral battleground state in his first year of office.

Obama has held more fundraisers than previous five Presidents combined as he visits key swing states on 'permanent campaign' | Mail Online

***
There is no doubt about it – politicians need money. The average Congressional campaign cost just over $1 million in 2002. The average Senate campaign cost over $3 million.

IEEE-USA: Building Careers & Shaping Public Policy

***
In 2008, Barack Obama spent $730 million in his election campaign, and John McCain spent $333 million.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_in_the_United_States

***
Obama Campaign Aims to Collect $1 Billion While GOP Relies on Super PACs
by Laura Colarusso Feb 5, 2012

Obama Campaign Aims to Collect $1 Billion While GOP Relies on Super PACs - The Daily Beast

***
Do you know how much money $1 billion is? During a 4-year presidential term, Obama needs to raise $684,931.50 every single day.

Can a man or woman who we elect to "REPRESENT" us and perform in a specific "important" job raise $684,931.50 seven days-a-week, for 1460 straight days - while doing a good job for us?

I'm with you Sarcogito, it's time for term limits. Keeping a good representative in office isn't worth the absolute nightmare that re-elections cost in dollars and in distraction from the job we elect the representative to do.
 
I think people ought to be able to vote for whoever is out there, assuming they meet the qualifications for the office. Term limits are stupid for any office, and I've never understood the logic of telling a President 'I'm sorry, you can't run again because people might elect you'.
 
Two terms works fine but we should put term limits on congressmen and senators.

Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk 2
 
This is the only instance of term limits that I support. The Presidency has grown in power so much since WWII, that we call him "The Leader of the Free World." IMO, that's too much power to hold for too long of a period of time. Especially without the input of the rest of the "Free World" that he is apparently the leader of.

I've considered if a 6 year term is OK, but I think it's best to have a referendum on his performance once in a while.

Ask people in Germany, the UK, Japan, or France if they think that the US President is "the leader of the free world". You will discover that we are only ones that use that figure of speech.
 
There are two reasons for the limited terms of the President. One is what happened with FDR, the other is the precedent set by Washington showing by example that he didnt want one man to accumulate too much power over the country.

I think we need that more today than we did in Washington's time, the power of the Presidency has grown over the years.
 
6 yrs is too long to get saddled with a failure...I say leave it the same...its one year to get started with anything...2 yrs to make it or break it and then the last year is campaigning for the next year..so they get nothing done anyway....
 
I think it's perfectly fine the way it is, but I would support repealing the 22nd Amendment. Why should the term be limited? If the majority wants someone to be president again, it only seems right to me that they should be.
 
How many people that are in office right have been in office for longer than twenty years? This was never supposed to be a career but a service for the citizens of the country and the only way to even get a hint of that back is to start with term limits.
 
A single 6 year term would be far preferable. Presidents wouldn't have to campaign and would be free to make the tough choices they generally make in their 2nd terms. I'm torn on Congress though. The side affect of having people in Congress so long is they know the issues exceptionally well. Senator Lugar for one (shame the TP Is trying to get rid of him). Term limits on Congress ensures we get a Congress who constantly no idea what they're doing. But it does get rid of the graft and corruption.
 
Back
Top Bottom