Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would be awesome if they stopped Presidential term limits and Bill Clinton would run against Obama and the Republican challenger. I would vote for Bill Clinton for a third term. Many others would too.
To the contrary I think it would be better to allow just one term per person, maybe a 6-year term. This way they wouldn't spend the first four years wondering if this or that decision might cost them votes in the reelection campaign They could do what they really think is the right thing to do.
I dont get the big deal on this.. Yes MAYBE Clinton would have won a 3rd term if we had no term limits.. But from what I can think of, No president since the 1970's would have been any different if we had no term limits probably.. Clinton's was not doing well in the summer and autumn of 2000. The country seemed to be in a mood that it wanted a change.
Lets go back though if no term limits existed.. Nixon, still ousted, Ford, still beaten.. Carter one termer regardless, Reagan and his Alzheimers would not have allowed a 3rd term, Bush sr would have still only been a one termer.. Clinton likely 2 terms, and Bush jr 2 terms...
Seems some here have forgotten the 2000 election. Though it was dull Al Gore, he lost because of his connection to Clinton
As for term limits for congress, good, but do it right. When Louisiana passed term limits for our state legislature, they threw in a loop hole to allow them to go run for the other side of congress when their term limit was up. So Senators ran for representative and reps ran for senate.
Uh huh. And in the 222 years the Constitution has been operative, it's never happened. It's right up there with a 35-year-old President -- possible, but never going to happen.
So, here in the real world, the way the Constitution gets amended is by 2/3rds of both houses of Congress submitting a proposed amendment to the states, and 3/4ths of those states ratifying it.
I'm well aware of that, Clinton's wildly successful tax plan was the main reason for the economic boom. It was passed when he had complete democratic control of congress and not one right winger voted for it.
From 1995-2000, we had a GOP Congress, not Democratic.
Do you lie this much on purpose, or do you really just make it up as you go along?
I dont get the big deal on this.. Yes MAYBE Clinton would have won a 3rd term if we had no term limits.. But from what I can think of, No president since the 1970's would have been any different if we had no term limits probably.. Clinton's was not doing well in the summer and autumn of 2000. The country seemed to be in a mood that it wanted a change.
Lets go back though if no term limits existed.. Nixon, still ousted, Ford, still beaten.. Carter one termer regardless, Reagan and his Alzheimers would not have allowed a 3rd term, Bush sr would have still only been a one termer.. Clinton likely 2 terms, and Bush jr 2 terms...
Actually, Clinton was doing extremely well in the summer/autumn of 2000. On June 6, 2000, his approval rating was 60%. It never dipped below 55% for the remainder of his term, climbing as high as 66% (twice) along the way. Presidential Approval Ratings -- Bill Clinton
I am not saying I wish he would have run for a third term -- I'm glad he didn't. I'm just pointing out that your claim is ralse.
I dont get the big deal on this.. Yes MAYBE Clinton would have won a 3rd term if we had no term limits.. But from what I can think of, No president since the 1970's would have been any different if we had no term limits probably.. Clinton's was not doing well in the summer and autumn of 2000. The country seemed to be in a mood that it wanted a change.
Clinton no doubt would have won a third term. I'm not sure what you are talking about with him not doing well, Clinton left office with a 66% approval rating, the highest of any president since FDR
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave
Seems some here have forgotten the 2000 election. Though it was dull Al Gore, he lost because of his connection to Clinton
Gore did win the election. He had the popular vote and only lost from Jeb making some votes "vanish" in Florida giving W the win. Though yes Gore was dull and no where near as liked as Clinton was.
He was far less progressive and more centrist than clinton, lacked the charisma, and all around just wasn't Clinton. Because of this, this is why Nader did quite well that year taking away Gore's liberal vote.
Again like stated before, when Clinton left office, he had the highest presidential approval rating since FDR. The economy was soaring, gas prices were low, mcdonald's had signs out front begging people to work for them starting at $10 an hour, we had the biggest surplus in US history and well on our way to being debt free etc,..Times were good under Clinton.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They could do what they really think is the right thing to do.
From 1995-2000, we had a GOP Congress, not Democratic.
