American Political Term Limits

**devonin** · 08-30-2007, 01:49 PM

In Canadian politics, all elected positions in government have no term limits. IE. At not point does the law forbid you from continuing to run for a political office simply on the grounds of you having filled that office a set amount of time.

In the United States, while the same is true for the House and Senate, the office of the President is forbidden to those who have served two terms in office.

The subject I'd like to see discussed is this: "Do you feel that a two-term limit on the presidency, especially in a system where any candidate can run regardless of whether they are the elected leader of one of the two large parties, is a good idea?"

It seems to me that if a given party, candidate and ideology are what the people want, they should be allowed to continue to elect that candidate until such a time as they no longer want that person running the country.

If the people want Candidate X for 20 years, why should that be forbidden from happening?

(EDIT: PLEASE PLEASE don't turn this into a "GWB rigged elections, if he could keep running, he'd keep rigging elections forever and we'd be doomed" thread. I'm talking about the policy itself, not the one specific example of how it might go wrong)

08-30-2007, 01:49 PM	#1
devonin Very Grave Indeed Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Ontario, Canada Age: 42 Posts: 10,120	American Political Term Limits In Canadian politics, all elected positions in government have no term limits. IE. At not point does the law forbid you from continuing to run for a political office simply on the grounds of you having filled that office a set amount of time. In the United States, while the same is true for the House and Senate, the office of the President is forbidden to those who have served two terms in office. The subject I'd like to see discussed is this: "Do you feel that a two-term limit on the presidency, especially in a system where any candidate can run regardless of whether they are the elected leader of one of the two large parties, is a good idea?" It seems to me that if a given party, candidate and ideology are what the people want, they should be allowed to continue to elect that candidate until such a time as they no longer want that person running the country. If the people want Candidate X for 20 years, why should that be forbidden from happening? (EDIT: PLEASE PLEASE don't turn this into a "GWB rigged elections, if he could keep running, he'd keep rigging elections forever and we'd be doomed" thread. I'm talking about the policy itself, not the one specific example of how it might go wrong)

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)