Longer Presidential term?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zelmo, Nov 3, 2004.

  1. zelmo macrumors 603

    zelmo

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Mac since 7.5
    #1
    I haven't thought this all the way through, so feel free to punch holes in this (like I needed to pass out an invitation :p ):

    Every election year when the incumbant is eligible for re-election, no matter who the President is, I always feel, to some degree, like 4 years is not enough time to figure out if the guy did his job or not. Whenever we get a new President, it seems like the first year or so is all about turning the government in a different direction, so not a whole lot really gets accomplished. Then you've got maybe a year to 18 months where you can see a new direction defined and starting to come together (whether you like it or not). Then, during the last 18 months to two years, so much time and energy is directed at campaigning for re-election.
    I'd like to know what you think about a six year Presidential term, retaining the "two consecutive terms in office" maximum.

    (puts on flame retardant suit and ducks head...)
     
  2. mypantsaretight macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    #2
    I support a Monarchy. Long live King George the Second. Mayhaps he wilst abdicate in favor of his brother who currently reigns in the southlands as Duke of Florida. Duke Jeb would make a good and just king as well.
     
  3. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #3
    I think if you make it a 6 year term, which is an interesting idea, you need to make it a one term limit.

    Longer terms are an interesting idea because then the candidates don't waste a quarter of their first term campaigning. But 12 years of anyone seems like too much.
     
  4. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #4
    4 years for some canidates *cough*bush*cough* is bad enough and they shouldn't be allowed 4 years and 1 day, so giving hem 6 years is definitley too much
     
  5. zelmo thread starter macrumors 603

    zelmo

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Mac since 7.5
    #5
    12 years is indeed a long time, but only a scant few would likely earn that.The people would have a far better chance to see what you're really made of over the course of a 6 year term, so it'd be more likely that a real majority (not a sad 51/49 split) would either vote you back in or get you the heck out.
    Most of my adult life, when the Democrat's have the Presidency, the Rebublican's have controlled the House and Senate, or vice-versa, and as a result not a whole lot gets accomplished. People are too busy trying to un-do what the prior administation did, then it's time to campaign some more. A waste of time and resources, better invested in making the country stronger. No one has to work too hard at it, because they know it'll all be up in the air in a political instant - they just have to worry about looking good enough to get re-elected. Longer terms mean less time campaigning and more time either getting it doen or being exposed to the population as a fraud.
     
  6. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #6
    I'm with you. I was ready to get Bush out of here two years ago.
     
  7. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #7
    Pfft, I was ready to get rid of the shrub the day after he was inagurated
     
  8. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #8
    One six year term should be plenty.

    The first four years is all posturing to get re-elected anyway. With one six year term you can speak your mind, and do what you truly believe is best rather than worry about how you are going to get re-elected.

    Maybe add an option kind of like the recall ballot in CA where people can vote for the new challengers but also keep the incumbent in office if they would like. Set the incumbent keeping office to an absurd percentage, something like 75% of the popular vote. If 3/4 of the people want you for another 6 years you can have it otherwise you're out, oh yeah, and no campaigning by the incumbent after the first 6 year term, we sent you to D.C. to work, if you do your job well you get to keep it.

    Basically make it almost impossible for the incumbent to get re-elected unless they have won the vast majority of the country to their side.
     
  9. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #9
    If a person is good enough at their jobs, they wouldn't have to campaign for a second term (or future terms for Congress). Needless to say, we haven't had an obvious choice in awhile. McCain and Clinton notwithstanding.
     
  10. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #10
    Personally I think that the 2 term limit should be repealed as it is a direct violation of my freedom to vote for who I want for president.
     

Share This Page