Posted on 11/30/2013 7:35:40 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
His only hope which he and his cohorts are fueling the fires within is martial law, and “if all else fails” senario
There was a government from a country even closer than Mexico that limited presidents to a single 6-year term: the Confederate States of America.
Not being eligible for reelection is a double-edged sword. Every second term since the 22nd Amendment has been a disaster; couldn’t part of the reason be the fact that the president simultaneously is unchecked by a pending reelection, and ignored by Congress due to his lame-duck status?
As for unicameralism, no freaking way. We need two houses to protect us from abuses of power by a single body.
And there’s no such thing as a “non-partisan” legislature; legislators belong to factions and parties, even if they don’t admit to it.
Yes 18.56%
No 81.44%
Zhang Fei: I love the info on your personal page. Very thoughtful. Are you Asian, by chance?
Does this mean we can expect a showdown campaign between Baraq Obama and twice un-elected Co-president Hillary Clinton?
Do Barak's 2 months as "Office of the President-Elect holder" count against his final 2 months (is THIS why he wants to remove term limits)?
Yes, but as I indicated in post #73, the CSA never lasted long enough to see how that would work out, and I argued that even if they had lasted until 1866, Jefferson Davis would have likely been granted an "emergency extension" in office because the CSA was in no position to hold national elections and have a smooth transition of power to a successor in the Presidency.
Mexico is really the only nearby country where we can see the effects of a single 6 year term in office.
I hate the Nebraska leg for it’s non-partisan elections which can only serve to help democrats and RINOs win Republican districts, or help wackjobs like Ernie Chambers win democrat districts. And it keeps NE from ever being counted among the legislatures we control despite us controlling it for decades I presume. When was the last rat majority?
Unicameralism intrigues me since the courts ruled all leg districts must be even in population so State Senates can’t be geography-based. But you make an excellent point, since MOST legislation is crap, something that makes stuff harder to pass is good. And there isn’t really a compelling reason for any state to consider switching to one house. Ventura pushed it in Minnesota when he was Governor, it went nowhere. People by and large don’t give a damn about “process” stuff like this.
As for POTUS term limits, they are going nowhere, nor will we ever limit them to 1, so this debate is purely for “fun”.
Could the professor be right about term limits? Is reelection being off the table a major part of the reason most second terms suck? Possibly, I don’t think so but maybe. I think most Presidents have sucked and that is the main reason.
When balanced against the threat of some awful President winning a third term, forget it. How many Presidents since Coolidge (or ever?) would we have liked to give a third term? Reagan in 1988? The only hard yes. Ike in 1960 to keep that swine Kennedy from having a 50/50 chance at victory?
Clinton would have won in 2000, yikes.
Limit to a single term is intriguing (4 or 6 years) but Mexico and the VA Governorship aren’t exactly shining examples of that system.
I know this it what they want...liberals have been talking about changing the term limit since he was elected the first time, now it is going to go mainstream. I notice the libs were not mentioning this when we had President Bush. If I remember correctly, it was President Reagan that quashed it when he was President, he was not interested in it being changed for him.
Repeal gets proposed in Congress every year or every other year -- 21 times in the last 20 years is one statistic floating around. Both Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell have proposed repeal at one time or another. Efforts went nowhere. I don't expect them to get any further this time, but if they do, it's possible that Obama would be excluded (as Truman was by the original amendment).
Yes 18.56%
No 81.44%
****
Results after I voted about one minute ago are exactly the same.
So the Washington Post poll is FIXED. Will wonders never end!!!!
Surely it was accidental.
;-)
Yep, Surely it was ;-)
That does not make sense. I can only imagine that he didn’t like your “idea” because it completely negates one man, one vote. And before you ask, yes I disagree with the electoral college, but at least it takes into account population. Why would a county with only 50 people get the same amount of votes as a county with 230 people?
“Why would a county with only 50 people get the same amount of votes as a county with 230 people?”
Because it negates voter fraud. And I am for the electoral college.
I won’t say RR had a bad second term (although I’m a RR fanatic, so my objectivity is very skewed).
One six year term for POTUS would be a positive development. Too bad we didn’t get to see it in action in the CSA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.