Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

nomorenomore08

(13,324 posts)

10. I think there are good arguments to be made one way or the other. So in the end, I'm neutral. n/t

Reply to craigmatic (Original post)

Fri Sep 26, 2014, 10:39 PM

Sep 2014

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is it time to repeal the 22nd Amendment? [View all] craigmatic Sep 2014 OP

Yep. Voters know best. -- Even when they don't know. immoderate Sep 2014 #1

Consider we'd have had another 10 years of daddy Bush and Nancy Reagan Warpy Sep 2014 #24

Any system can go awry. It's a matter of who bears responsibility. immoderate Sep 2014 #39

The term limits allows policiticians to "play the clock" DontTreadOnMe Sep 2014 #2

Good point. "Running out the clock" is always (or nearly always) an issue during second terms. n/t nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #7

No SickOfTheOnePct Sep 2014 #3

What, you didn't want a third Reagan term? Cayenne Sep 2014 #13

I'm assuming you forgot the sarcasm smiley n/t SickOfTheOnePct Sep 2014 #16

Clinton would have mopped the floor with Bush caraher Sep 2014 #4

We would have had 23 years of fucking Reagan even as he slowly turned into a vegetable. CBGLuthier Sep 2014 #5

No way. Brigid Sep 2014 #6

That's also a very valid point. n/t nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #8

I would postulate . . . Brigid Sep 2014 #12

Bush wouldn't have beaten Clinton and would geek tragedy Sep 2014 #17

I don't know unless Huffington Post tells me what to think because I'm a...... NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #9

I think there are good arguments to be made one way or the other. So in the end, I'm neutral. n/t nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #10

I would oppose the repeal of the 22nd amendment to my dying breath. MohRokTah Sep 2014 #11

Our thoughts are similar edgineered Sep 2014 #15

No. 2 terms is enough still_one Sep 2014 #14

I'm fine with letting the voters decide Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #18

Reagan would have won in 1988, possibly even 1992. tritsofme Sep 2014 #19

I would like to see one 6 year term Travis_0004 Sep 2014 #20

Great ideas SickOfTheOnePct Sep 2014 #21

I like this idea. Brigid Sep 2014 #23

That too has it's drawbacks davidpdx Sep 2014 #30

We would end up with a Cheney for life Generic Other Sep 2014 #22

Only if that's what the people want. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #27

Hanging chads, voting machines, Dieboldt Generic Other Sep 2014 #28

Were Obama's victories legitimate? (nt) Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #29

Don't ask me Generic Other Sep 2014 #32

i trust the people but not the system. spanone Sep 2014 #25

I would like it changed to one 6yr term. nt CK_John Sep 2014 #26

I answered this one above as well to someone else davidpdx Sep 2014 #31

No.... 8 years is plenty. devils chaplain Sep 2014 #33

I'd like to see a six term with a public option on a second jaysunb Sep 2014 #34

"The whole reason why we have this amendment..." Boreal Sep 2014 #35

well since this is not about the 2nd amendment Duckhunter935 Sep 2014 #37

Oh, no! Boreal Sep 2014 #38

Nnnnnnope. TERM LIMITS FOR ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS. ONE IN, ONE OUT. Then you can run again. cherokeeprogressive Sep 2014 #36

The short answer is NO. badtoworse Sep 2014 #40