Should term limits apply to U.S. Presidents? poll

http://capitalnews.org/


C-Span polling on presidential term limits?

Should term limits apply to U.S. Presidents?
Yes


91%

No


9%



Total Votes: 527

Should term limits apply to U.S. Presidents?
Yes
91%


No
9%

Total Votes: 513

one 6 year term. Then you have automatic lameduck status, and things will work a lot smoother. An immediate lameduck, will have to think and work DIFFERENTLY and the Congress will have to deal with the president differently. In other words, Congress can't kiss the prez's ass for four years. He becomes unelectable, immediately, and they are ALWAYS having to think about their constituents, because they are always RUNNING.

...because late last week, someone posted information about a bill that was working its way through the House. I'm writing from memory, so I apologize that I don't have more information! The bill would repeal the 22nd Amendment, which mandates term limits for the President and VP.

So....are they trying to see how open the public is to abolishing term limits, so Junior can catapult the propaganda for another decade or so?

Also--I think the overwhelming 92 percent majority, who says 'no way in hell should term limits be abolished' is a commentary on how much Junior is loathed. If we had a kick-ass President who was going a "heck of a job", I think people would be more open to the idea.

In this poll, the people are screaming, "ABSOLUTELY HELLLLLL NOOOOOO!"

but Congress CAN propose a constitutional amendment, which then needs a 2/3 majority to pass, and if it does, it then must be ratified by 3/4 of the states to take effect.

on his way now. The mental deterioration is quite evident.

I say 1 millisecond terms for Repubs.......no limit for Dems.

If a President is doing a good job, keep them in. If they're doing a horrible job, vote them out.

It should be up to the citizens to decide.

sadly I can not say that.

We may lose a good thrid term once in a while by having the 22nd Amendment but I think it's worth it to avoid the President-For-Life crap that some countries suffer under.

Power goes to people's head. There needs to be term limits to keep this in check.

I am unalterably opposed to term limits for any office.

No, I don't want to see that asshole Bush get another four years, but it sure would be nice to say "President Clinton" without having to stick "former" in front of it.

Term limits do nothing for us. All they do is rob us of our right to vote for the candidate we think is best for the job if s/he happens to already have it.

We already have the best term limits possible, but we refuse to use them. It should be simple. They do a good job, they get to keep it at election time. They do a lousy job, they're outta there. But too many Americans can't be bothered to get their fat lazy asses out of the barcalounger and over to the polling place.

We have this overemployed ape in the White House because too few of us gave a damn about being informed and casting an informed vote. It shouldn't have been close enough - in either 2000 or 2004 - to steal.

Guess that 7% is the * administration, oil barrons and crony appointees voting.

Getting hit by some cons who don't realize that then Clinton could run again?

I wouldn't mind eliminating term limits if, and ONLY IF, we eliminate Diebold, and bring back the Fairness Doctrine. And not a day sooner.

Although, if there were no term limits, we'd never have had that lying criminal W in office. We'd still be saying "President Clinton".

I also saw articles about the proposal to repeal the 22nd Amendment. There are so many Republican controlled states, I'm sure they could get their 75% in the next 2 years. Legitimately or otherwise.