Third Term?? - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

TwitchKitty · #16 11-30-2013, 06:11 AM

Change is part of the game. Throw a little hope to the SHEEP in you and keep the SLAVE in you off guard.

Funny how the R. Pres gives big money a windfall in war profits and financial scams then a D. Pres is elected to give big money windfalls in social programs. All the while big money *****es and moans because it ain't fair that they are so put-upon. They got you comin' and goin'.

t walgamuth · #17 11-30-2013, 08:27 AM

I am not in favor of term limits for any office. I think folks should be able to elect anyone they wish.

engatwork · #18 11-30-2013, 08:32 AM

What would keep Prez O from being a "write in" prez to start the third term?

t walgamuth · #19 11-30-2013, 08:37 AM

The constitution. I am not sure about a third term if non consecutive. Maybe Bubba will run again!

engatwork · #20 11-30-2013, 08:46 AM

LOL

LandYaghtLover · #21 11-30-2013, 08:54 AM

Not that this will happen, but until his death Roosevelt served 3 terms and started his fourth.

And as a historical fact:
Likewise, another Democrat, Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, introduced a similar proposal six times in recent years, also regardless of which party was currently occupying the White House. Hoyer introduced such proposals in 1995, 1997, and 1999 (all during the presidency of Bill Clinton), and again in 2001, 2003, and 2005 (all during the presidency of George W. Bush).

Other members of Congress who have offered similar proposals in the last twenty years include the following:
Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts (Democrat): 1995, 1997, and 1999 (all during the presidency of Bill Clinton).
Rep. David Dreier of California (Republican): 1997 (during the presidency of Bill Clinton).
Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York (Democrat): 1995 (during the presidency of Bill Clinton).
Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky (Republican): 1995 (during the presidency of Bill Clinton).
Rep. Guy Vander Jagt of Michigan (Republican): 1991 (during the presidency of George H.W. Bush).
Rep. Martin Sabo of Minnesota (Democratic-Farmer-Labor): 1991 (during the presidency of George H.W. Bush).

So enjoy your tinfoil hats folk if you think this is anything new. Yawn.

spdrun · #22 11-30-2013, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

The constitution. I am not sure about a third term if non consecutive. Maybe Bubba will run again!

Prohibited -- the language in the 22A is absolute ("no person shall...") and doesn't limit itself to consecutive terms.

MS Fowler · #23 11-30-2013, 09:00 AM

Obama can have his third term after Reagan gets his third term. Otherwise, no dice.

cmbdiesel · #24 11-30-2013, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Obama can have his third term after Reagan gets his third term. Otherwise, no dice.

Too much zombie BS in this country already...

Although who could say whether a dead man would be worse than a live one... seeing as how the last few live ones turned out...

I think you've convinced me...
Re-elect Reagan.

greazzer · #25 11-30-2013, 09:41 AM

The most recent polls put Obama at a 38% approval rating and he has a long three years to go. It is unlikely he will hit 50% again. Even with a vast majority of minorities who give him a thumbs-up regardless, his numbers are apparently permantently tanked to some degree. Bush (the 2nd) had an average rating of 49% during his 8 years. His first term average was 62% and second term was 37%. Bush's low point was 25% and his high point was 90%. Obama's average is tracking at 49% for his first five years. Obama's all time high is 69% and his low dipped to 37%, which may have risen a smidge over the past month or so.

As much as Bush was (and is) villified, Obama is doing no better. Further, much of Bush's downturn in popularity was hinged to the popularity of Obama who promised "Hope-and-Change" and who did spend a large amount of his time bashing Bush over the economy. If the next guy in the opposite party(ies) does the same exact thing, then I suspect that Obama's numbers will appear even worse in hindsight. Compounding matters for the concept of an Obama third term are three signficant factors which are really not discussed on the media or the academics to any degree. I exclude the hype.

1. If the ACA a/k/a Obama-Care fails or performs lack luster, then that will most likely tarnish the legacy of Obama. So far, it does not look so hot, but time will tell.
2. If the public debt (and deficit) really receives some matrure attention, the public will see that our children and grandchildren are signficantly impaired. If the young or younger start to internalize this issue, and they voted overwhelmingly for Obama, there will be a backlash to some degree.
3. If the US Dollar, which is tied to the USA's posture in the world slips moreso, then our overall "buy-our-way-out-of-a-jam" is somewhat gone, then what do we do? Right now, world perception has us at #2 for the most part. That all happened in the last few years.

So, I doubt Prof. Zimmerman spent any real time looking at the numbers. Just as America loved Bill Clinton after the fact, there was a lot of Clinton fatigue during his eight years. As for Regan, he seems to have survived the passage of time to some degree. No third term for Reagan, however ... he's long gone.

t walgamuth · #26 11-30-2013, 10:08 AM

As you say, time will tell on Obama's approval ratings.

As for Clinton? Yeah, the right was fatigued of him. He was sort of the energizer bunny who kept on going. He probably could have been elected to a third term in a heartbeat.

People simply liked him.

Kerry and Gore? not so much.

If Gore had utilized Bubba to campaign for him he probably would have won too.

Gore bought into the Right's retoric about how bad Bubba was.

cmbdiesel · #27 11-30-2013, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greazzer

The most recent polls put Obama at a 38% approval rating and he has a long three years to go. It is unlikely he will hit 50% again. Even with a vast majority of minorities who give him a thumbs-up regardless, his numbers are apparently permantently tanked to some degree. Bush (the 2nd) had an average rating of 49% during his 8 years. His first term average was 62% and second term was 37%. Bush's low point was 25% and his high point was 90%. Obama's average is tracking at 49% for his first five years. Obama's all time high is 69% and his low dipped to 37%, which may have risen a smidge over the past month or so.

As much as Bush was (and is) villified, Obama is doing no better. Further, much of Bush's downturn in popularity was hinged to the popularity of Obama who promised "Hope-and-Change" and who did spend a large amount of his time bashing Bush over the economy. If the next guy in the opposite party(ies) does the same exact thing, then I suspect that Obama's numbers will appear even worse in hindsight. Compounding matters for the concept of an Obama third term are three signficant factors which are really not discussed on the media or the academics to any degree. I exclude the hype.

1. If the ACA a/k/a Obama-Care fails or performs lack luster, then that will most likely tarnish the legacy of Obama. So far, it does not look so hot, but time will tell.
2. If the public debt (and deficit) really receives some matrure attention, the public will see that our children and grandchildren are signficantly impaired. If the young or younger start to internalize this issue, and they voted overwhelmingly for Obama, there will be a backlash to some degree.
3. If the US Dollar, which is tied to the USA's posture in the world slips moreso, then our overall "buy-our-way-out-of-a-jam" is somewhat gone, then what do we do? Right now, world perception has us at #2 for the most part. That all happened in the last few years.

So, I doubt Prof. Zimmerman spent any real time looking at the numbers. Just as America loved Bill Clinton after the fact, there was a lot of Clinton fatigue during his eight years. As for Regan, he seems to have survived the passage of time to some degree. No third term for Reagan, however ... he's long gone.

If approval ratings had any direct relation to elections then our congress would be all freshmen...

The 9%: Congress's Approval Rating Hits the Single Digits | TIME.com

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Congressional Job Approval

greazzer · #28 11-30-2013, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

If approval ratings had any direct relation to elections then our congress would be all freshmen...

The 9%: Congress's Approval Rating Hits the Single Digits | TIME.com

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Congressional Job Approval

They do to some degree. If there was a real measure of the incumbency advantage, turn over rates, and the competition, those ratings actually do have some value.

So, if you could remove the incumbency advantage, those poll ratings have much more value. Plus, unless the "other guy" runs a decent campaign, most folks have no clue who the competitor is. I am thinking of an Eddie Murphy movie right now, but the name escapes me ...

t walgamuth · #29 11-30-2013, 10:29 AM

Approval ratings don't mean a whole lot. The election is all that matters and in an election you are comparing the candidate to a real person who has to show themselves well as opposed to comparing the candidate to some mythical ideal office holder.

Dubyagee · #30 11-30-2013, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Too much zombie BS in this country already...

Although who could say whether a dead man would be worse than a live one... seeing as how the last few live ones turned out...

I think you've convinced me...
Re-elect Reagan.

Zombie Reagan Raised From Grave To Lead GOP - YouTube