2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumObama Third Term?
Would you support it? He would run better against Trump then either dem right now.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Eight years is enough
I think Obama was decent, did a lot of good in several areas, but eight years of any president is enough, imo.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)The constitution makes this situation illegal.
rock
(13,218 posts)Example please. With links. Unless you're just a blowhard, then, never mind.
(Applause)
And what we see right now I think is just the beginning of directed attacks and self-radicalization that leads to attacks like what we think happened in San Bernardino. And were going to have to ask our technology companies, and Israel is a leader in this area, to help us on this. You know, the government is good in some respects, but nowhere near as good as those of you who are in this field.
Right now the terrorists communicate on very ubiquitous sites: woman jihadist in San Bernardino posted her allegiance to Baghdadi and ISIS on Facebook. According to the timing we know so far, she did it either shortly before or shortly after the attack, Im not sure which. Were going to have to have more support from our friends in the technology world to deny online space. Just as we have to destroy their would-be caliphate, we have to deny them online space.
And this is complicated. Youre going to hear all of the usual complaints, you know, freedom of speech, et cetera. But if we truly are in a war against terrorism and we are truly looking for ways to shut off their funding, shut off the flow of foreign fighters, then weve got to shut off their means of communicating. Its more complicated with some of what they do on encrypted apps, and Im well aware of that, and that requires even more thinking about how to do it.
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/events/2015/12/04-saban-2015-israel-us-yesterday-today-tomorrow/transcripts/uncorrected-transcriptkeynote-addressformer-secretary-of-state-hillary-rodham-clinton.pdf
tularetom
(23,664 posts)I'm nowhere near as sick of him as I was of Bill Clinton or Bush Jr at the same point in their 2nd terms.
And I would prefer a 3rd Obama term to a 1st term of either Trump or Hillary Clinton.
But, no. He's had his turn. We need new faces.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)He appointed and got professionally close to the Greenspan crowd of Geithner and Bernanke.
On edit: Larry Summers too!
He appointed Hillary Clinton to the top spot at State.
Bill Clinton's favorite Monsanto shills got appointed by Obama also.
So in a sense, should Hillary get in, it will be her third term!
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)also open the door to a Bush third term.
The 22cnd has its merits.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)tinrobot
(10,927 posts)Seems like he'll be very happy to leave at the end of this term.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Garrett78
(10,721 posts)It sure beats the alternative.
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)Barack Obama, like Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, is an example why it is good to have term limits. (They should be applicable to members of Congress.)
PragmaticLiberal
(904 posts)Let's be honest: If PBO could run again (and wanted to), he'd defeat Sanders/Clinton & Trump.
Not even a contest.
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,601 posts)tritsofme
(17,422 posts)While his mind and body were ravaged by Alzheimer's.
He certainly would have won in 1988, 1992 wouldn't have been impossible. And who is to say they couldn't have trotted him out one last time in 1996 in the midst of the dotcom boom so they could "beat" FDR with 5 presidential election victories?
I understand why FDR pursued 3rd and 4th terms in the midst of WWII, but I think Washington's precedent was a wise one.
Aside from the safety valve it provided in the Reagan situation, I think it is good to have president's limited after two terms. The modern presidency is an incredibly powerful institution, and incumbent presidents go into elections with great advantages, that would only continue to grow as they consolidate power going into a third or fourth term. I just don't feel that the idea of a de facto president for life, even if voted for by a majority is healthy in a liberal democracy.
runaway hero
(835 posts)IMO, terms limits is a sign of an immature democracy. The people, not a piece of paper, should decide when you're done. I agree with you but let's not forget the president is still weak domestic policy wise.
tritsofme
(17,422 posts)small "r" republicanism, Cincinnatus, George Washington and all that.
But as I said, I think the modern presidency is too powerful an institution to allow one person to consolidate power over a decade after or more.
I do not agree with term limits for Congress however, lobbyists would be the main benefactors as they quickly became the only professional lawmakers in Washington.
runaway hero
(835 posts)But I think that terms limits only provides for things like 2 billion dollar election campaigns. In truth, if we didn't have presidential term limits, we would have no citizens united.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)runaway hero
(835 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)I still prefer Obama to Hillary Clinton.
However, Bernie Sanders is my first choice.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Puglover
(16,380 posts)I supported Obama over Hillary in 2008. And would again in a heartbeat. But no to ANY 3rd term for ANYONE.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I don't agree with every decision he's made, but I think he's the best President of my lifetime.
Having said that, I support Presidential term limits.
MineralMan
(146,345 posts)So, it's a non-question. It doesn't matter whether people support it or not. The Constitution prohibits from running again.
Next question...
runaway hero
(835 posts)MineralMan
(146,345 posts)Maybe. But I doubt that you'll get 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of the states to ratify repeal of that amendment. I don't see any enthusiasm for more than two terms coming from anyone right now.
Amending the Constitution is intentionally very difficult to do. The 22nd was done due to FDR, actually. We decided that limiting the time a President could serve was a good idea. It's very unlikely we'll get rid of those limits.
But, even if the process began, it would take years to approve, and that seems even less likely during the first term of either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, don't you think?
runaway hero
(835 posts)The republicans, who will they run after Trump? And I feel term limits is just another way for lobbyists to make money. 2 billion dollar presidential campaigns every 4 years? This is democracy?
MineralMan
(146,345 posts)As for the two-term limit for Presidents, getting rid of that will be far more difficult than you think. People from both parties are aware that it could result in control for many years by a member of the opposition party. Nobody wants that, so we have that amendment. Changing that isn't really in the cards at all.
runaway hero
(835 posts)Voters should decide, just like with the Primaries.
Pisces
(5,602 posts)DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)So as an academic exercise, in that hypothetical scenario, he would have my vote.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)I would happily abolish it. Let the people choose who they want as president.