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.

The constitution makes this situation illegal.

Example please. With links. Unless you're just a blowhard, then, never mind.

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.

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!

also open the door to a Bush third term.

The 22cnd has its merits.

Seems like he'll be very happy to leave at the end of this term.

It sure beats the alternative.

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.)

Let's be honest: If PBO could run again (and wanted to), he'd defeat Sanders/Clinton & Trump.

Not even a contest.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I still prefer Obama to Hillary Clinton.

However, Bernie Sanders is my first choice.

I supported Obama over Hillary in 2008. And would again in a heartbeat. But no to ANY 3rd term for ANYONE.

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.

So, it's a non-question. It doesn't matter whether people support it or not. The Constitution prohibits from running again.

Next question...

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?

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?

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.

Voters should decide, just like with the Primaries.

So as an academic exercise, in that hypothetical scenario, he would have my vote.

I would happily abolish it. Let the people choose who they want as president.