Originally posted by whodey Why then the severly low national approval rating of Congress? Is this not a concern in your fabled democracy?
I have no idea what you think the relevance of this particular hobby horse of yours is to what I have stated on this thread. Low approval ratings in a democracy is surely a different topic for a different thread.
Why would you need to Amend the Constitution. All you have to do is have Obama run, then have a Supreme Court say that it's Constitutional. Amending the Constitution wouldn't work because not enough states would pass it.
Go through the courts, bypass the will of the people. That's the American way!
Originally posted by FMF I think term limits should be ditched as they are a restriction of democratic choice but I don't think there's any mileage in ditching them specifically "so Obama can run for 3rd term". Perhaps if you'd chipped in with a proposal to end term limits for the Presidency just as an incumbent, with whom you profoundly disagreed, looked capable of winning a third term, then your desire to amend the constitution would have more credibility. 😵
I don't believe in ditching term limits because of the examples of Cincinnatus, George Washington, Nelson Mandela, etc.
But if we did ditch them, it should be done in the same way as congressional pay raises -- taking effect only after the current officeholder leaves office.
Originally posted by twhitehead As we all know, democratic choice is far from perfect. We know well that the incumbent has a significant advantage in most cases, especially here in Africa where he typically has access to government funds for his campaign, as well as manipulating the media. But even when access to government funds is not available, the ability to manipulate the economy i ut when you vote for president, at least some of your vote is for the presidents speech writer.
Eliminating term limits would give the incumbent a huge incentive to become a mere demagogue -- and each incumbent would push the system further to favor incumbents.
Edit: which has an adverse effect on democratic choice
I would really like having President Obama continue into a third term, but was also looking forward to Hillary winning the Presidency in 2016 and wary of amending the Constitution.
Seriously, I know no way any amendment would ever make it in today's climate, but it was a nice thought to think about have a great leader continue.
Originally posted by whodey What about those in Congress who keep getting elected even though their approval ratings continue to deteriorate and are now around 13%?
Do you really hate democracy that much FMF?
Constituents love their incumbent congress person, but want to kick out all others. And interestingly, in a democracy, it is up to the constituents of who they vote for in their district.
Originally posted by whodey Why then the severly low national approval rating of Congress? Is this not a concern in your fabled democracy?
I'm not sure I get your point. There are plenty of countries with no term limits and vastly higher approval ratings of Parliament (pretty much any rich Western country).
Term limits are a bad idea (for the reason FMF stated) and they are the wrong remedy for having a President who has too much power. A better solution would be to limit the President's power, by for example taking away the power to veto bills and issue Executive Orders.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra I'm not sure I get your point. There are plenty of countries with no term limits and vastly higher approval ratings of Parliament (pretty much any rich Western country).
Term limits are a bad idea (for the reason FMF stated) and they are the wrong remedy for having a President who has too much power. A better solution would be to limit the President's power, by for example taking away the power to veto bills and issue Executive Orders.
Presidential power is already limited by veto override. And executive order power is largely usurped. The 22nd amendment was clearly a response to the first four term President. No others had ever served three.
I can find fault with term limits, or with no term limits. As to limiting Democracy, there are lots of intentional limits to that. I would be content with returning choice of Senators to State legislatures. reducing democracy.
I find referring to Obama as a 'great leader' really strange. Instead of making unemployment his first priority, since W left him in such a hole, he decided to go for a long time progressive's wet dream, a national health care system. He sort of got one, that his own people don't much like, and which acts to hamper any solution of the most pressing problem. That is leadership?
Originally posted by normbenign Presidential power is already limited by veto override. And executive order power is largely usurped. The 22nd amendment was clearly a response to the first four term President. No others had ever served three.
I can find fault with term limits, or with no term limits. As to limiting Democracy, there are lots of intentional limits to that. I would b ...[text shortened]... ke, and which acts to hamper any solution of the most pressing problem. That is leadership?
I always find this claim bizarre. Congress passed Obama's stimulus package three weeks after his inauguration. Do you right wingers have exceedingly poor memories or weren't you paying attention?
Amend Constitution so Obama can run for 3rd term?
27 Nov '12 14:23
Back to Top