Is The Real Purpose Of The 22nd Amendment To Protect A President From Doing Too Good A Job?

[THUNDER HANDS]

You know, a job so good that he actually ends our dependance on war and solves the problems of poverty and improves the lives of vast amounts of people?

It would seem to be the only purpose to it. Because if a president becomes a tyrant and makes people's lives worse, he wouldn't be re-elected again and again.

And it seems funny that the amendment was put in place after FDR, who many consider to be either the greatest, or second-greatest, president ever.

I'd find it hard to believe that the other amazingly well-regarded president - Lincoln, would have served only two terms if he wasn't killed.

It seems to be a check on the ability of this country to keep a problem-solver around and make sure that there's the chance that any good work can be undone by the next guy.

[originalpckelly]

1. What the fuck are you smoking?

:shrug:

Please don't give any to Bush.

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. you think Bush would be re-elected?

[texanshatingbush]

3. Having lived long enough to observe a great deal of human nature...

...I realize that Lord Acton's statement (Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely) is unfortunately true.

This country seems to do best when a degree of balance exists. Politics is the art of compromise.

The current crop of rePublicans thinks God is on their side and they have a moral and holy mandate to do as they are doing. Others of us would beg to disagree.

It seems to me that you have to realize that other viewpoints--to those who hold them--are as valid as your own, and seek peaceful and progressive co-existence. If one end of the spectrum prevails, we set ourselves up, ultimately, for a rending of the social fabric. AND, parties in power tend to ensure that they stay in power. Just witness the Tom DeLay-guided gerrymandering of Texas Congressional Districts, which will have an impact on who is elected in Texas for years to come. Not to mention the impact of the packing of the US Supreme Court with wingnut favorites. The social fabric of our country will be bent if not rent by wingnuts for years to come, even though they may no longer be in office.

Differing viewpoints must have voice. Even I was able to shut up my dearly-loved, but unfortunately wingnut, brother with the comment that calling something The Patriot Act doesn't leave much room for honest difference of opinion.

[Skinner]

4. I think the point is to blunt the power of incumbency.

Yes, it would be nice to have the option to re-elect good presidents for more terms.

But that is outweighed by the likelihood that mediocre or awful presidents get re-elected because of the power of incumbency. So, no, it's not to limit the good presidents, it's to limit the bad ones.

And I also think there might be a bit of "after two terms in power, even the best people get corrupted."

[originalpckelly]

5. You know, I'd be curious to go back and look at why the founders even created multiple terms...

They did not specifically limit the terms of office, and I wonder if there was a purpose behind that.

[THUNDER HANDS]

6. isn't that hard to measure though

since FDR was the only president to have served more than two terms?

All the bad ones are usually kicked out after 2 terms. And since most presidents are in their 60s when elected, they'd be in frail health otherwise.

[Skinner]

7. That's not exactly true.

Before FDR, the tradition was for presidents to step down voluntarily after two terms. Most were not "kicked out."

[THUNDER HANDS]

8. the lifespan was also shorter then

If you were elected in your late 50s or early 60s, you probably weren't expected to live past your early 70s anyway, if that.

Plus, most of the presidents before FDR either served only one term due to defeat in office, switching parties, or dying in office. At least, from the turn of the century on.

[Zynx]

9. Grant and Wilson both made efforts, but ran into various problems.

You are correct though.

[baldguy]

10. Its there to keep progress from happening too quickly

There are too many rich & powerful people getting wealthier & more powerful catering to our problems. Not SOLVING them, mind you - just catering to them.

[aikoaiko]

11. two terms in the presidency is a good check and balances power.