Term limits to be a Presidential candidate, not just in office (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2024, 12:02:43 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  Term limits to be a Presidential candidate, not just in office (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Well?
#1
No term limit
 
#2
Three consecutive terms
 
#3
Three total terms
 
#4
Two consecutive terms
 
#5
Two total terms
 
#6
Other
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 20

Author Topic: Term limits to be a Presidential candidate, not just in office  (Read 13563 times)
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« on: August 31, 2007, 03:50:35 PM »

Would you support a State law requiring a Presidential candidate to have not been on the ballot in the general election in a lot of preceding two Presidential elections?

Given the wide deference granted by the Constitution to the State Legislatures in how they decide to be electors, I don't see any Constitutional objections.  Other than FDR, the only three Presidents who would have been affected by this idea in the era of popular election are Andrew Jackson, Grover Cleveland, and Richard Nixon.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2007, 08:23:55 PM »

No matter what your opinion of the man, do we really need Ralph Nader running for President a fourth time?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2007, 12:39:44 AM »


How so?  The States can choose electors any which way they want to.  Restricting the office of elector to people who commit to not voting for a person who has run for President a certain number of times is certainly no less constitutional than requiring electors to state ahead of time who they have commited to voting for specific Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2007, 12:32:43 PM »


How so?  The States can choose electors any which way they want to.  Restricting the office of elector to people who commit to not voting for a person who has run for President a certain number of times is certainly no less constitutional than requiring electors to state ahead of time who they have commited to voting for specific Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.

But electors don't HAVE to vote how they say anyway.

Then perhaps we should go back to listing the electors on the ballot instead of the persons that they plan to vote for when the electoral college convenes. 
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2007, 12:21:34 PM »

I'd LOVE to see us return to the ORIGINAL Constitution of the USA!

And you'd have fights and assassinations and power plays - no - it's the world's dumbest idea.  Think of how many assassinations we'd have.

<devil's advocate>
Probably none.  Until Lincoln tore up the Constitution in his treasonous quest to conquer the Confederate States, not a single President died by violence.
</devil's advocate>
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.024 seconds with 15 queries.