Is this election yet more proof the 22nd Amendment was a bad idea?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2024, 10:33:24 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Is this election yet more proof the 22nd Amendment was a bad idea?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Is this election yet more proof the 22nd Amendment was a bad idea?  (Read 3709 times)
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2015, 03:21:04 PM »

Just because Trump is off the wall and Hillary is an elderly grandmother does not mean we want Obama for a third term.

Why in the world is somebody being a grandmother supposed to be a strike against her?

If you read what I said, it was simply an observation that a grandmother is preferable to an Obama third term.
Logged
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2015, 03:22:48 PM »

Just because Trump is off the wall and Hillary is an elderly grandmother does not mean we want Obama for a third term.

Why in the world is somebody being a grandmother supposed to be a strike against her?

If you read what I said, it was simply an observation that a grandmother is preferable to an Obama third term.

Again, implicit in that statement is an assumption that a grandmother is a bad thing to be.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,776


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2015, 03:24:05 PM »

FDR is the only one that served over two terms, but TR ran for President seeking a non-consecutive third term (albeit he ascended to the Presidency after McKinley's assassination) and Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in 1880. 

Lyndon Johnson technically ran for a third term in 1968, though he also ascended to a partial term via assassination.

Not true.  Lyndon Johnson was the nominee and candidate for President for the Democratic Party only once, in 1964.

Yes, but he ran in the primaries. Similarly, Grant was a candidate at the convention in 1880 but was not the nominee in the general election.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2015, 03:32:36 PM »

FDR is the only one that served over two terms, but TR ran for President seeking a non-consecutive third term (albeit he ascended to the Presidency after McKinley's assassination) and Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in 1880. 

Lyndon Johnson technically ran for a third term in 1968, though he also ascended to a partial term via assassination.

Not true.  Lyndon Johnson was the nominee and candidate for President for the Democratic Party only once, in 1964.

Yes, but he ran in the primaries. Similarly, Grant was a candidate at the convention in 1880 but was not the nominee in the general election.

From the perspective of actually being a candidate for President, one must either be a party nominee or an independent or a third party candidate running for President.

A failed candidate running for a party nomination does not make them a candidate for President, only a candidate for a Presidential nomination.  There is a difference. 
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2015, 04:16:21 PM »

One must believe that Barack Obama is not only indispensible to the political system (he is likely to have much to offer as an ex-President) but also to the Presidency.

He isn't FDR, but he won't be disappearing from the political scene.  

...Just think of how much damage a senile Ronald Reagan could have done after 1988. But that is medical. Now contemplate a third term of Dubya -- grab the barf bag -- with a cult of personality to cover his weaknesses as a leader.

 

You'd just have George H. W. Bush, James Baker and Ed Meese governing the country as a behind-the-scenes junta that occasionally trotted Reagan out to give maybe five minutes of feel-good prepared remarks before depositing him back in the Oval Office to eat jelly beans and watch old movies of himself.

I believe the term is "troika".
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,080
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: December 19, 2015, 04:21:20 AM »

FDR is the only one that served over two terms, but TR ran for President seeking a non-consecutive third term (albeit he ascended to the Presidency after McKinley's assassination) and Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in 1880. 

Lyndon Johnson technically ran for a third term in 1968, though he also ascended to a partial term via assassination.

Not true.  Lyndon Johnson was the nominee and candidate for President for the Democratic Party only once, in 1964.

Yes, but he ran in the primaries. Similarly, Grant was a candidate at the convention in 1880 but was not the nominee in the general election.

So Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan each ran for a third term in 1972 and 1984 respectively, and John McCain for a second term in 2008?  Huh
Logged
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,715
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: December 19, 2015, 08:01:54 AM »

FDR is the only one that served over two terms, but TR ran for President seeking a non-consecutive third term (albeit he ascended to the Presidency after McKinley's assassination) and Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in 1880. 

Lyndon Johnson technically ran for a third term in 1968, though he also ascended to a partial term via assassination.

Not true.  Lyndon Johnson was the nominee and candidate for President for the Democratic Party only once, in 1964.

Yes, but he ran in the primaries. Similarly, Grant was a candidate at the convention in 1880 but was not the nominee in the general election.

LBJ served only 14 months of his Kennedy's term before being elected in his own right.  TR ascended to the Presidency 6 months into McKinley's term.  Really, LBJ's situation is different, although it's true that if LBJ had been re-elected in 1968, he'd have been only the 2nd President to serve more than 8 years in office.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.22 seconds with 13 queries.