Presidential term limit reform

[Bojack Horseman]

Would you support changing the 22nd Amendment to read,

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice consecutively, 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 the President more than once until eight years have elapsed since their final term in office has ended pursuant to this amendment.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Just increase term length to 6 years (and the House term to 3 years).

[Enduro]

I'd support it.

Just increase term length to 6 years (and the House term to 3 years).

I'd also support this idea.

I wouldn't pursue these ideas though, just vote aye.

[RI]

I'd prefer no term limits ever.

[ScottieF]

I'd prefer no term limits ever.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

I'd prefer no term limits ever.

Let Voters decide whether they want to reelect the incumbent President. Also I am not sure how many two term Presidents would come back out of retirement to seek a third term anyways, Bill Clinton might be the only one that would want to do that,and be  elected.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Term limits are a bad bad idea.

[Sir Mohamed]

Term limits are a bad bad idea.

[Clark Kent]

Nope. I prefer limiting the President to two, four-year terms.

We should also have limits on Senators (three terms, maybe?).

[Slander and/or Libel]

Nope. I prefer limiting the President to two, four-year terms.

We should also have limits on Senators (three terms, maybe?).

Why? What's the practical reason for limiting citizens' ability to put the candidate of their choice into office?

[Clark Kent]

Nope. I prefer limiting the President to two, four-year terms.

We should also have limits on Senators (three terms, maybe?).

Why? What's the practical reason for limiting citizens' ability to put the candidate of their choice into office?

Career politicians are a bad idea and have a tendency to grow corrupt.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Nope. I prefer limiting the President to two, four-year terms.

We should also have limits on Senators (three terms, maybe?).

Why? What's the practical reason for limiting citizens' ability to put the candidate of their choice into office?

Career politicians are a bad idea and have a tendency to grow corrupt.

That's why we subject them to re-election at the end of their term. Why is this not sufficient?

[Mr. Reactionary]

Nope. I prefer limiting the President to two, four-year terms.

We should also have limits on Senators (three terms, maybe?).

[Virginiá]

That's why we subject them to re-election at the end of their term. Why is this not sufficient?

I suppose if it were sufficient, we wouldn't have unpopular incumbent politicians at various levels of government getting re-elected simply because of both the letter next to their name and the fact that they are the incumbent. A lot of people don't really vote in a way that makes no term limits sufficient.

On the other hand, if a very large majority of voters actually did a generous amount of research into the candidates and kept up with how the president is truly handling things, then term limits might not be so bad.

However, arguing with myself here, I could also say that limiting presidential terms allows for a diversity of ideas to be applied to the country, helping to avoid a continuation of some ideas that may not be bad, but not good either. What if the electorate was say, just reliably Republican enough that a Republican president could squeak by with 51%~ of the vote for 4+ elections in a row? That's 49% of the electorate who has to live with someone they didn't want and some of whose policies they do not favor. They at least deserve a fair chance to elect a leader that also represents them (given how incumbency helps re-election, 'fair' would be not letting an incumbent continually make use of that advantage)

[TNF]

No, because in practice that would create a situation whereby power-hungry lunatics (the Clintons) could return to office after waiting a brief spell ad infinitum. I do not want want to live in a world where we alternate Clintons or Bushes every few years in order to make it possible for one of them to rule again after a certain period. The Presidency is the worst branch of government (aside from the entirely despotic Supreme Court) and should really just be abolished outright.

[Vosem]

I'd prefer no term limits ever.