• 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!

Hillary Clinton violates the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment

I don't know about the 22nd applying, but President Clinton did a terrible job with the economy and still has not admitted to realizing it in public. And she is obviously still living in the fuzzy dream of the party her husband gave and whose hangover is still with us.

Yeah, those eight years of prosperity were just AWFUL.
 
Is there really any question that Hillary is in violation of the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment? Really, this point is not even debatable. Bill Clinton would be an active part of Hillary Clinton's presidency if she gets elected. First it will be as Hillary stated, and then who knows how far it will go? Bill Clinton eventually could conceivably have as much if not more power than Hillary herself, becoming a de facto third term president. Can you say king and queen in the White House?

Yes, there really is any question.
 
I'm sorry for what I've said before, Stephen. Your posts are actually quite interesting.

No, they're not. They're boilerplate wingnut claptrap.
 
I consider her eligible now. I stated she violates the "spirit", she is not technically violating the law as the law stands now.

That being said, you bring up a very interesting premise about if she fell ill or died. I hadn't thought of that and intend to ponder it. I usually don't concern myself with hypotheticals, too boring...but in this case with Hillary's coughing, fainting, etc, your premise is a real possibility. Of course as we know the VP would then automatically become president. Whether or not there would be a power play by Bill Clinton or some other leftist who feels that Tim Kaine is incapable of doing the job, is unlikely...but we never can tell what leftists may do.

Thanks for the reply.

Ah yes, those darn leftists. Remember all the other times those evil, wicked leftists tried to change the presidential order of succession?
 
Too much of a stretch there and I don't think it is a violation "even in spirit" of the 22nd amendment. Most of your commentary in this regard is just assumption. Especially considering you would first have to accept that Hillary would "let" Bill advise her on anything or be active. Bill Clinton is a good fundraiser but that is about it. In a Hillary presidency she would be calling the shots and I seriously doubt she would consult with Bill on anything let alone take his advice.

This is just as absurd as the OP's premise. Of course Hillary will consult Bill. It's foolish to think otherwise. And yanno what ... I hope she does.
 
I'll remember that the next time I visit Lincoln DC or the state of Lincoln right above Oregon.

So, you're claiming that Washington is automatically BEST EVER because a state and city are named after him, both of which were either established or designated and named before Lincoln took office?

I'm 50/50 on the Lincoln vs. Washington debate for Best Preznit Ever, but your argument as to why Lincoln might not be the better president is ... well, it needs improvement to be considered a weak one.
 
Yeah, those eight years of prosperity were just AWFUL.

Parties are always fun till the punch bowl falls off the table.
 
Interesting that nobody in this thread is asking the same question about The Bush presidencies?
 
Further, what is to stop someone from interpreting that the same should apply to former vice presidents seeking the presidency?
 
If the supreme court were to agree, I would think you might have something,
Until then I prefer Hillary loose on her own merits!
 
Hillary Clinton violates the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment

Article from Stephen50right

Here is our Twenty Second Amendment:

“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.”

Some background on this Twenty Second Amendment. George Washington was our greatest president. Arguments can be made about who was the second greatest, but those who fully understand American history, know that Washington was the greatest, and the second greatest president is a distant second.

Washington chose to only serve two terms. There were reasons for this, but the bottom line is that he retired after two terms. Up until 1940, all other presidents decided to honor Washington's two term idea. But in 1940, with WW2 on the brink for America, Franklin Roosevelt ran for a third term and won. Then he ran for a fourth term in 1944 during WW2 and won.

Roosevelt suffered from the crippling effects of polio as a child, so he was never in really good physical health throughout his lifetime. However he persevered in his wheelchair and became a great leader. But because of ill health and the stress of wartime, he ran out of gas and died in April 1945 at the age of 63, less than a year into his fourth term. Looking at the old videos from that time of the Yalta Conference in February 1945, Roosevelt looks like 93 years old, and didn't appear to quite have all his complete mental faculties any longer.

So, because of We The People not desiring anyone in America to have too much power over us, and realizing the stress of the presidency can have on an individual even in peacetime, the Twenty Second Amendment was passed by Congress in 1947, then ratified by the states in 1951.

We got rid of a king in 1776, and certainly most Americans do not want a king or a queen occupying the White House. However, Hillary Clinton if she gets elected in November, clearly is violating the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment. She knows this, but like most leftist politicians, she doesn't even care. Leftist leaders by their nature, always detest the current constitution of a country in which they have gained supreme power. They will then do what they can to alter or remove the current constitution, and create a new constitution that suits their leftist agenda.

There have been two sons of presidents who have been elected president. Both sons did not involve their fathers in the running of their administration. However, Hillary Clinton has stated about her husband Bill Clinton who of course was a president that served the maximum two terms, quote;"my husband, who I will put in charge of revitalizing the economy 'cause he knows what he's doing."

Is there really any question that Hillary is in violation of the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment? Really, this point is not even debatable. Bill Clinton would be an active part of Hillary Clinton's presidency if she gets elected. First it will be as Hillary stated, and then who knows how far it will go? Bill Clinton eventually could conceivably have as much if not more power than Hillary herself, becoming a de facto third term president. Can you say king and queen in the White House?

Of course with leftists such as Hillary, far left is always better, and extreme or radical far left is better still for her, but not better for America. Not for our Founding Fathers who despised having a king and queen rule over them. Also not for today's patriotic Americans who value their freedom and liberty, and the rule of law such as that document called The Constitution of the United States of America.

It would be unusual to put the same power couple back in the White House and is, in fact, a violation of the spirit of the law. But, if we know anything about Billary, it all depends on your definition of "is."

One reason her losing to Trump would be a good thing, BTW, would be that stake driven through the heart of all things Clinton. It just sucks that we have to be strapped with a buffoon in order to destroy the Clintons. Trump is like the poison pill...or chemo---you have to almost kill the country to save it.
 
President Clinton did a terrible job with the economy and still has not admitted to realizing it in public.

Um, no.
 

Exactly! He still hasn't admitted it. But, if he did, he would disillusion so many people. He probably doesn't want to do that.
 
If the supreme court were to agree, I would think you might have something,
Until then I prefer Hillary loose on her own merits!

I'm sure November 9th is gonna be a sad day for you. The Democrats put up their worst, and she still soundly beats your guy!
 
not a violation of the 22nd amendment. however, the gerrymandered two party system is an insult to the concept of democracy, and it will continue to provide us with bad choices.
 
I'm sure November 9th is gonna be a sad day for you. The Democrats put up their worst, and she still soundly beats your guy!

My wife said they must subconsciously want Hillary as president. It's the only explanation for why they would nominate someone who can't win.

I have to agree. The alt-right sabotaged the Republicans' chances to beat Hillary. That, deep down in their addled minds, they must want her to win is the only explanation.
 
I'm sure November 9th is gonna be a sad day for you. The Democrats put up their worst, and she still soundly beats your guy!
Whoever wins, it should be on their merits or defects, not because of legal trickery.
 
I'm sure November 9th is gonna be a sad day for you. The Democrats put up their worst, and she still soundly beats your guy!

The nastiness of people making it "personal" is deplorable...
 
Whoever wins, it should be on their merits or defects, not because of legal trickery.

Does this mean you're already calling fraud? If so prove it, without alt-right conspiracy media preferably.
 
Does this mean you're already calling fraud? If so prove it, without alt-right conspiracy media preferably.
Not at all, and how could you possibly read that into what I said.
Whoever wins, it should be on their merits or defects, not because of legal trickery.
I want the candidate that wins, to do so because of the election, not because one or the other were excluded through legal maneuvering.
 
Not at all, and how could you possibly read that into what I said.

I want the candidate that wins, to do so because of the election, not because one or the other were excluded through legal maneuvering.

Just made a bad assumption I guess. In my defense though, this year I've seen some Trump people advance some pretty wacky conspiracy theories about how they will get robbed this year in the election.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1066337432 said:
When Bill was POTUS Hillary did state, "We are the president."

I suspect that half of her support-at least among men-comes from people who liked her husband's administration and hope to get four more years of the 93-2001 regime
 
Hillary Clinton violates the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment

Article from Stephen50right

Here is our Twenty Second Amendment:

“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.”

Some background on this Twenty Second Amendment. George Washington was our greatest president. Arguments can be made about who was the second greatest, but those who fully understand American history, know that Washington was the greatest, and the second greatest president is a distant second.

Washington chose to only serve two terms. There were reasons for this, but the bottom line is that he retired after two terms. Up until 1940, all other presidents decided to honor Washington's two term idea. But in 1940, with WW2 on the brink for America, Franklin Roosevelt ran for a third term and won. Then he ran for a fourth term in 1944 during WW2 and won.

Roosevelt suffered from the crippling effects of polio as a child, so he was never in really good physical health throughout his lifetime. However he persevered in his wheelchair and became a great leader. But because of ill health and the stress of wartime, he ran out of gas and died in April 1945 at the age of 63, less than a year into his fourth term. Looking at the old videos from that time of the Yalta Conference in February 1945, Roosevelt looks like 93 years old, and didn't appear to quite have all his complete mental faculties any longer.

So, because of We The People not desiring anyone in America to have too much power over us, and realizing the stress of the presidency can have on an individual even in peacetime, the Twenty Second Amendment was passed by Congress in 1947, then ratified by the states in 1951.

We got rid of a king in 1776, and certainly most Americans do not want a king or a queen occupying the White House. However, Hillary Clinton if she gets elected in November, clearly is violating the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment. She knows this, but like most leftist politicians, she doesn't even care. Leftist leaders by their nature, always detest the current constitution of a country in which they have gained supreme power. They will then do what they can to alter or remove the current constitution, and create a new constitution that suits their leftist agenda.

There have been two sons of presidents who have been elected president. Both sons did not involve their fathers in the running of their administration. However, Hillary Clinton has stated about her husband Bill Clinton who of course was a president that served the maximum two terms, quote;"my husband, who I will put in charge of revitalizing the economy 'cause he knows what he's doing."

Is there really any question that Hillary is in violation of the spirit of the Twenty Second Amendment? Really, this point is not even debatable. Bill Clinton would be an active part of Hillary Clinton's presidency if she gets elected. First it will be as Hillary stated, and then who knows how far it will go? Bill Clinton eventually could conceivably have as much if not more power than Hillary herself, becoming a de facto third term president. Can you say king and queen in the White House?

Of course with leftists such as Hillary, far left is always better, and extreme or radical far left is better still for her, but not better for America. Not for our Founding Fathers who despised having a king and queen rule over them. Also not for today's patriotic Americans who value their freedom and liberty, and the rule of law such as that document called The Constitution of the United States of America.

And does this same criticism apply to the Bush dynasty too, I wonder?
 
Back
Top Bottom