HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Three term presidencies.

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 03:52 PM

Three term presidencies.

American presidents are at a disadvantage on the world stage in their second term, carrying the moniker of lame duck. If there was a three term limit, the GOP would have benefitted little, if at all. 1960, Eisenhower was certainly going to retire; The Reagan Era would have still have ended in 1992, and come 2000 Clinton was within an ace of pulling off an Israel/Palestine settlement.

Not to mention Bill and Obama would have won 3rd terms in blow outs.

14 replies, 1427 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 14 replies Author Time Post
Reply Three term presidencies. (Original post)
crazytown Dec 2019 OP
tritsofme Dec 2019 #1
crazytown Dec 2019 #4
FBaggins Dec 2019 #2
crazytown Dec 2019 #3
Sherman A1 Dec 2019 #5
crazytown Dec 2019 #6
Sherman A1 Dec 2019 #7
crazytown Dec 2019 #9
Sherman A1 Dec 2019 #11
crazytown Dec 2019 #14
roamer65 Dec 2019 #8
Patterson Dec 2019 #10
Sherman A1 Dec 2019 #12
crazytown Dec 2019 #13

Response to crazytown (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:04 PM

1. It's possible Reagan would have remained president until 1997

With his health stage managed to the extent possible. They would have definitely tried to win a fourth term to “match” FDR.

I don’t support term limits for most offices, but the presidency is incredibly powerful, and the advantages of incumbency are immense. I think Washington’s precedent was generally a good one, and that eight years is enough for one man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:21 PM

4. I'm thinking a three term limit.

No president for life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:04 PM

2. It doesn't matter that it might help our party

The two-term limit was (and remains) a good idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:20 PM

3. Good presidents should be able to reap the rewards of a third term IMO.

I'm thinking TR here, as well as Clinton and Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:42 PM

5. 2 is enough

in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:47 PM

6. TR, Clinton, Obama.

America has paid a heavy price for an arbitrary two term limit. 1941 - 1945 was the USA's finest hour. Yes a limit, three not two.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:49 PM

7. I understand your point

and simply disagree. I believe that Washington was correct in his decision and the precedent that he set.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:54 PM

9. Ulysees S. Grant and the end of reconstruction,

When AA's were becoming established in legislatures? As I said, the USA has paid a heavy price for two term limits.

(Washington was concerned about an American monarchy. The presidency was very much as experiment then).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:59 PM

11. And we may have likewise paid a heavy price

if we changed it to 3 terms. Would you really want 3 terms of Nixon, Reagan, Bush II, Trump? The suggested plan cuts both ways.

Be careful what you wish for.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 05:06 PM

14. Bush II was done in 2008.

The GOP could not have run away fast enough. It's not at all certain that Reagan would have won in 1988, or that his third term would have looked much different from Bush I.

Yeah I know it's just wistful thinking, but ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:50 PM

8. Elections are the vehicle for term limits, not a stupid constitutional amendment.

The 22nd amendment is just about as stupid as the now repealed 18th.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazytown (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 04:58 PM

10. Three term Democrats would be OK. Republicans would be disaster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Patterson (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 05:00 PM

12. Precisely

Hence the problem with the concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Patterson (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 31, 2019, 05:01 PM

13. A third term for Ulysses S Grant would gave cemented reconstruction,

A third term for Reagan would not have made much difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread