If Third Terms Were Constitutional...

[Helix]

Almost everyone who voted for Bill twice would have voted for him again, plus a few more. I am sure he would have won...big.

On the flip side, very few who didn't vote for Bush twice already would have voted to give Bush a third term. Judging by the mess he made of things, he might have even lost some of those votes. But, even Bush probably would have held onto about 40% of the vote total--the die hard GOP would have cast ballots for him. However, those who voted for him only once would probably bolt, and no one old enough who didnt vote for Bush in 2000 or 2004 would have voted for him in 2008. So, I suspect Bush would have lost in a landslide.

Would prople vote for Obama a third time? Would he pick up votes or lose them?

I would vote for Barack again. Definitely. But...I'm not sure he holds onto all the other votes he's won. Too bad we passed that amendment. Because now we'll never know.

i'm all for presidential term limits, even though the field at this point for 2016 doesn't look that great. we do not need and would not benefit from three or four term presidents. in fact, i might even support one six year term.

if you want to make the choices better, end gerrymandering nationwide. it would be quite simple to do if there was enough public demand to do it.

 

[calamity]

You have to remind me which law Gingrich broke.

Law of hypocrisy, since he was banging an intern and cheating on his own wife while he went after Clinton.

 

[Perotista]

I seen polls, I look for them to post, that suggests that of those that voted for Obama in 2012, about 79% would vote for him again.

Polls today may show the public's fustration with Obama and other politicians, but I don't know if that would translate in not voting for.

I think it depends on what you are looking at and you must be looking within the polls themselves which break things down. Here is a way to figure out what percentage of the vote President Obama would get using approval ratings and party identification numbers. Don’t scoff at this as this method came with a single point of predicting the percentages Obama and Romney actually received in 2012.

Democrats make up 29% of the electorate, Gallup as of 8 April 2014, President Obama has an 80% approval rating among Democrats, Gallup as of 20 April 2014 with a 13% disapproval rating. What this translate out to 24.36%.

Independents make up 46% of the electorate per Gallup, President Obama has an 38% approval rating among them with a 56% disapproval rating which translate out to 18.86%

Republicans make up 25% of the electorate, President Obama has an 10% approval rating among them and a 85% disapproval rating, which translates out to 3.0%.
Add them all up 24.36 from Democrats, 18.86 from Independents and 3.0% from Republicans and you come out with 46.22% of the total vote.

Granted in 2012 these numbers were different for President Obama as back then Democrats made up 35% of the electorate, Independents only 35% and Republicans 30%. Obama’s approval rating overall was at 51% vs. his 44% today.

 

[calamity]

i'm all for presidential term limits, even though the field at this point for 2016 doesn't look that great. we do not need and would not benefit from three or four term presidents. in fact, i might even support one six year term.

if you want to make the choices better, end gerrymandering nationwide. it would be quite simple to do if there was enough public demand to do it.

I like the one six year term idea.

Working with that concept, I believe we need to limit to twenty-years the term of SCOTUS justices.

 

[1750Texan]

I think it depends on what you are looking at and you must be looking within the polls themselves which break things down. Here is a way to figure out what percentage of the vote President Obama would get using approval ratings and party identification numbers. Don’t scoff at this as this method came with a single point of predicting the percentages Obama and Romney actually received in 2012.

Democrats make up 29% of the electorate, Gallup as of 8 April 2014, President Obama has an 80% approval rating among Democrats, Gallup as of 20 April 2014 with a 13% disapproval rating. What this translate out to 24.36%.

Independents make up 46% of the electorate per Gallup, President Obama has an 38% approval rating among them with a 56% disapproval rating which translate out to 18.86%

Republicans make up 25% of the electorate, President Obama has an 10% approval rating among them and a 85% disapproval rating, which translates out to 3.0%.
Add them all up 24.36 from Democrats, 18.86 from Independents and 3.0% from Republicans and you come out with 46.22% of the total vote.

Granted in 2012 these numbers were different for President Obama as back then Democrats made up 35% of the electorate, Independents only 35% and Republicans 30%. Obama’s approval rating overall was at 51% vs. his 44% today.

This was ask specifically of those that voted for Obama in 2012, 79% overall would vote for obama again. then they broke it down by demographics with democrats at around 84% as I remeber.

 

[AJiveMan]

Almost everyone who voted for Bill twice would have voted for him again, plus a few more. I am sure he would have won...big.

On the flip side, very few who didn't vote for Bush twice already would have voted to give Bush a third term. Judging by the mess he made of things, he might have even lost some of those votes. But, even Bush probably would have held onto about 40% of the vote total--the die hard GOP would have cast ballots for him. However, those who voted for him only once would probably bolt, and no one old enough who didnt vote for Bush in 2000 or 2004 would have voted for him in 2008. So, I suspect Bush would have lost in a landslide.

Would prople vote for Obama a third time? Would he pick up votes or lose them?

I would vote for Barack again. Definitely. But...I'm not sure he holds onto all the other votes he's won. Too bad we passed that amendment. Because now we'll never know.

I'm sort of relieved that 2 terms is the limit, can you just imagine Bush with a third term? If you can, I can, and just wonder where else we'd be sending troops to now.

As for me right now, I don't want any more Bushes or and more Clintons as president, I want some new blood.

 

[Perotista]

This was ask specifically of those that voted for Obama in 2012, 79% overall would vote for obama again. then they broke it down by demographics with democrats at around 84% as I remeber.

That is probably right on the money, Obama received 51.1% of the vote in 2012 and 84% of that comes out to be a total of 42.9% not relying on new voters or Demographic shifts as in party affiliation and approval ratings. That number is fairly close to my 46% which took all the extras into account. Where President Obama really loses votes is among the independents which roughly split 50-50 in 2012, today they would vote against him and he would be lucky to get 42 or 43% instead of the 50% he received back in 2012. So in my normal long winded way, I am saying I agree with you.

 

[votemout]

Almost everyone who voted for Bill twice would have voted for him again, plus a few more. I am sure he would have won...big.

On the flip side, very few who didn't vote for Bush twice already would have voted to give Bush a third term. Judging by the mess he made of things, he might have even lost some of those votes. But, even Bush probably would have held onto about 40% of the vote total--the die hard GOP would have cast ballots for him. However, those who voted for him only once would probably bolt, and no one old enough who didnt vote for Bush in 2000 or 2004 would have voted for him in 2008. So, I suspect Bush would have lost in a landslide.

Would prople vote for Obama a third time? Would he pick up votes or lose them?

I would vote for Barack again. Definitely. But...I'm not sure he holds onto all the other votes he's won. Too bad we passed that amendment. Because now we'll never know.

I would not have and I did voted for him twice. The damage Clinton has done to this country can NEVER be undone. Besides voting for obama is the same as voting for Clinton.
Obama will institute martial Law before it is all over anyway and you will not have to even worry about voting ever again!
How would you like that?

 

[Perotista]

I'm sort of relieved that 2 terms is the limit, can you just imagine Bush with a third term? If you can, I can, and just wonder where else we'd be sending troops to now.

As for me right now, I don't want any more Bushes or and more Clintons as president, I want some new blood.

Bush didn't stand a chance of getting elected to a third term. You do not give the people the credit they deserve. Now Bill Clinton could have won a third term, looking at Obama's numbers today, the voters would not return him for a third term if he could run for one. Reagan could have won a third term and so too could have Eisenhower. But those three are the only ones and IKE was in ill health and wouldn't have run again in 1960 even if he could. Reagan had Alzheimer setting in and Nancy would have said no. So in reality the only president we can assume might have run for a third term since the 22nd amendment is Bill Clinton and he just might have.

Without the 22nd amendment there probably would have been no second Bush presidency.

 

[1750Texan]

I'm sort of relieved that 2 terms is the limit, can you just imagine Bush with a third term? If you can, I can, and just wonder where else we'd be sending troops to now.

As for me right now, I don't want any more Bushes or and more Clintons as president, I want some new blood.

Unlike maybe Obama support, Bush's support evaporated...It would have taken the gulf of Mexico size cup of koolaid for that to happen.

 

[Perotista]

I would not have and I did voted for him twice. The damage Clinton has done to this country can NEVER be undone. Besides voting for obama is the same as voting for Clinton.
Obama will institute martial Law before it is all over anyway and you will not have to even worry about voting ever again!
How would you like that?

I do not think Clinton did any damage to this country and was good for it although I never voted for him. I voted for Perot twice. Clinton did finally balance the budget which is to his credit. The economic times were good and he is remember fondly by most Americans except die hard Republicans. Clinton is about as far from being Obama as one can get, further than Bush the second. Clinton was a conservative Democrat who founded the DLC, a Democratic conservative organization. He proclaimed the era of big government over and pushed through welfare reform.

Bush the second and Obama have governed more a like than most people think.
TARP vs. the Stimulus
Iraq and Afghanistan vs. Libya and we are still in Afghanistan
One signed the Patriot Act into law and the other signed its extension
One ran up over 5 trillion in debt and the other is approaching 7 trillion
One gave us prescription plan part D, the other the ACA
Both have tried to expand free trade though out the world.
Both have and are increasing the size of government, of spending and so on and so forth and on and on.

If one would throw all the rhetoric out the window, if you like how Bush the second governed, you should like how Obama is governing and if you hated Bush, you should hate Obama. The main difference is the R and the D and that makes all the difference in the world on how quite a lot of people view these two presidents, not how they governed or what they did or are trying to do.

I'll take Clinton any day of the week over these last two yahoos.

 

[Perotista]

Unlike maybe Obama support, Bush's support evaporated...It would have taken the gulf of Mexico size cup of koolaid for that to happen.

Obama's support has evaporated quite a bit since 2012 too. From 51% down to 44%.

 

[Paschendale]

If third terms were constitutional, and people actually chose to run for them, then I would imagine that Eisenhower or Johnson would have worn a third term and none of our presidents after them would have been running in the same atmosphere and would likely not have been president.

 

[Kurmugeon]

If the Radical Left attempts to give Obama a third term, sadly, tens of millions of Americans will die.

-

 

[calamity]

Well, it sort of depends.

The main reason I voted for Obama in 2012 is not exactly a stunning endorsement of him. It was basically because anything I was against that Obama would or had done was also something Romney would do just as much if not more, and Romney would also do other things I'm against, which Obama would not.

It was a "lesser of evils" vote. There was nothing to gain by voting for him, but there was something to lose.

Obama is not going to be one of our greats. He's very much a politician, and he's not even a particularly progressive one. Obama is certainly not the "commie" a lot of people are accusing him of being, so I am not critiquing him from the stance of the right-wing rhetoric. I find him very disrespectful towards the people's privacy rights, and his commitment to focusing on the home turf is nothing but talk. He has a strong imperialist streak in him.

He hasn't done terribly as far as the economy is concerned, but he also hasn't done anywhere near enough. To some extent, to fix the economy, some stuff needs to be put back in place that Congress simply cannot pass at this time, being the pathetic waste of space that it is, but Obama didn't go far enough by a long shot.

He also hasn't defended progressive causes very much. He hasn't degraded them, I suppose, but he hasn't really fought for them the way he said he would either. Maybe a little in his first term, but not since then.

He's too caught up in wanting to be popular by letting small issues sideline him and then taking the safe road, he's not committed enough to the principles of the country, and he doesn't have a progressive way of thinking about foreign relations -- in fact he's quite reckless. By 2012, there was really not much reason to vote for him other than the fact that Romney would be just as bad on most metrics, and infinitely worse on others.

In a vacuum, asking the question of whether I'd vote for Obama again simply based on whether I like how he's done the job, the answer is no.

And I belong to one of his target voter bases: young progressive women. So that should tell you something.

I don't buy all this red versus blue ****. Obama is just another American politician. And that's an insult.

Obama is a Centrist. They tend to be bland, non-boat rocking types. That's Obama to a Tee: non-boat rocking and bland, whose rock star charisma only comes out when he's running for office.

I expected more but I'm not bothered by less. He's kept us out of harms way and pulled out of Iraq; he put in place a new healthcare model but did little to push forward any coherent jobs plan; he managed to get OBL and is aggressively chasing down al Qaeda leaders with drones, but he backed off on closing GITMO and blundered badly in Afghanistan, supporting one group of child molesters and religious fanatics in an effort to rid the country of another group of child molesters and religious fanatics.

All in all though, I still think he was our best option in both 08 and '12, with pretty much the same being the case in '16. I probably still see Obama as preferred over Hillary, and I fear the GOP will push on us another anti-abortion, creationist who thinks gays should be second class citizens.

 

[Fiddytree]

Anybody can take a photo with a king, but it takes a liberal to vote for kings and dictators. That includes the liberal Bush-clan too.

(never saw that first Bush photo - that is disgusting. Is it photoshop? It can't be real?)

.

We as a country liked instituting and supporting monarchies and dictatorships when it suited us. Not that I particularly mind that idea, because I thought it necessary.

Why are you sounding like such a liberal?

 

[calamity]

If the Radical Left attempts to give Obama a third term, sadly, tens of millions of Americans will die.

-

Who's being "radical" here?

 

[Fiddytree]

Almost everyone who voted for Bill twice would have voted for him again, plus a few more. I am sure he would have won...big.

On the flip side, very few who didn't vote for Bush twice already would have voted to give Bush a third term. Judging by the mess he made of things, he might have even lost some of those votes. But, even Bush probably would have held onto about 40% of the vote total--the die hard GOP would have cast ballots for him. However, those who voted for him only once would probably bolt, and no one old enough who didnt vote for Bush in 2000 or 2004 would have voted for him in 2008. So, I suspect Bush would have lost in a landslide.

Would prople vote for Obama a third time? Would he pick up votes or lose them?

I would vote for Barack again. Definitely. But...I'm not sure he holds onto all the other votes he's won. Too bad we passed that amendment. Because now we'll never know.

Landslide? No. Perhaps less of a close race than Gore v. Bush, but...keep in mind something else. Even though Clinton's popularity was relatively high, we cannot discount the notion that his court proceedings had substantively hurt his reputation and that of the Democratic Party. Even if you disagree with Gore's choice, there was a reason for why he distanced himself from Clinton. It wasn't out of line to perceive Clinton as a liability.

 

[calamity]

I do not think Clinton did any damage to this country and was good for it although I never voted for him. I voted for Perot twice. Clinton did finally balance the budget which is to his credit. The economic times were good and he is remember fondly by most Americans except die hard Republicans. Clinton is about as far from being Obama as one can get, further than Bush the second. Clinton was a conservative Democrat who founded the DLC, a Democratic conservative organization. He proclaimed the era of big government over and pushed through welfare reform.

Bush the second and Obama have governed more a like than most people think.
TARP vs. the Stimulus
Iraq and Afghanistan vs. Libya and we are still in Afghanistan
One signed the Patriot Act into law and the other signed its extension
One ran up over 5 trillion in debt and the other is approaching 7 trillion
One gave us prescription plan part D, the other the ACA
Both have tried to expand free trade though out the world.
Both have and are increasing the size of government, of spending and so on and so forth and on and on.

If one would throw all the rhetoric out the window, if you like how Bush the second governed, you should like how Obama is governing and if you hated Bush, you should hate Obama. The main difference is the R and the D and that makes all the difference in the world on how quite a lot of people view these two presidents, not how they governed or what they did or are trying to do.

I'll take Clinton any day of the week over these last two yahoos.

Sotomayer and Kagen vs Roberts and Alito--night and day differences there. Other avenues have the Bush and Obama roughly on the same page though. Agreed.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Few people not on the Right see the impeachment as anything other than a Republican witch hunt.

 

[votemout]

I do not think Clinton did any damage to this country and was good for it although I never voted for him. I voted for Perot twice. Clinton did finally balance the budget which is to his credit. The economic times were good and he is remember fondly by most Americans except die hard Republicans. Clinton is about as far from being Obama as one can get, further than Bush the second. Clinton was a conservative Democrat who founded the DLC, a Democratic conservative organization. He proclaimed the era of big government over and pushed through welfare reform.

Bush the second and Obama have governed more a like than most people think.
TARP vs. the Stimulus
Iraq and Afghanistan vs. Libya and we are still in Afghanistan
One signed the Patriot Act into law and the other signed its extension
One ran up over 5 trillion in debt and the other is approaching 7 trillion
One gave us prescription plan part D, the other the ACA
Both have tried to expand free trade though out the world.
Both have and are increasing the size of government, of spending and so on and so forth and on and on.

If one would throw all the rhetoric out the window, if you like how Bush the second governed, you should like how Obama is governing and if you hated Bush, you should hate Obama. The main difference is the R and the D and that makes all the difference in the world on how quite a lot of people view these two presidents, not how they governed or what they did or are trying to do.

I'll take Clinton any day of the week over these last two yahoos.

yea yea building a housing bubble knowing it was going to pop, because they had to hide the fact that he finished two trade agreements knowing that jobs would be leaving America. Those agreements that if you remember correctly Perot warned against and even stated "Giant Sucking Sound of jobs leaving America".
Read more at LiveLeak.com - Ross Perot was right "Giant Sucking Sound of jobs leaving America" if NAFTA enacted (comments)
LiveLeak.com - Ross Perot was right "Giant Sucking Sound of jobs leaving America" if NAFTA enacted (comments)

You state you voted for Perot but now Dont see the damage that Clinton has done? Lets not talk about the removal of Glass steagel which was enacted to prevent another GREAT DEPRESSION. Yea clinton did that!

But hey believe what you want My eyes are wide open.

AGAIN AS I HAVE SAID I DID VOTE FOR HIM TWICE. sadly made a mistake

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

If third terms were constitutional, and people actually chose to run for them, then I would imagine that Eisenhower or Johnson would have worn a third term and none of our presidents after them would have been running in the same atmosphere and would likely not have been president.

LBJ could have run for another term of POTUS but chose not to.

Ever heard of a place called Vietnam?

 

[votemout]

Few people not on the Right see the impeachment as anything other than a Republican witch hunt.

Obama has done many more and much worse things deserving impeachment.

 

[1750Texan]

If the Radical Left attempts to give Obama a third term, sadly, tens of millions of Americans will die.

-

you do realize that Obama would be an old man be the time any constitutional amendment would eventually make it to ratification...you are right we most likely would all be dead before that happend.

 

[HolyBull]

Unlimited terms leads to entrenched power and constant campaigning rather than governing. Look at Obama: the guy is a consummate campaigner, but it seems every major initiative he has put forward has either stuttered and failed or run into significant issues. Congress hasn't helped, but it's not like Obama is the first president to face hostility from the opposing side. Would I vote for him in 2016? It would depend on who the other options were, but I think that after eight years, the nation is usually ready to move on.

I personally like the idea of giving presidents one longer term and then sending them off to paint dogs and champion charities. Same with most elected positions. Over and over again, people have proven that they cannot handle power over the long run. Sweep out the corners before the spiders can build their webs.