Response to hrmjustin (Original post)
Sat Sep 29, 2012, 01:43 AM
eppur_se_muova (21,448 posts)
10. I'm actually against them.
Given the population turnover in any given district, the people who vote for a candidate the third time are not all the same people who elected him/her the first time. Should the new voters be denied the right to choose the representative they want just because someone else -- who may no longer reside in the district -- voted for them before ?
Remember, the limit on Presidential terms was legislated by vengeful R's after FDR's fourth victory. GOP presidents get to be too old (or too incriminated) for a third term; without the 22nd Amendment, only Clinton could have won a third term since, and we weren't better off with his successor. Most Presidents who sought a third term failed; no further "protection" is really needed. FDR probably won a fourth term largely because it was a wartime election. Personally, I'd love to see the 22A repealed just to get Obama (at least) one more term. The 22A seems to say that you can't give the voters what they want. I'd rather trust the voters to make the right decision.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|DURHAM D||Sep 2012||#2|
|Smarmie Doofus||Sep 2012||#5|
|Smarmie Doofus||Sep 2012||#9|
I'm actually against them.
Please login to view edit histories.