I've been doing this for 87 years now...

[Heep]

It would be interesting to see who would be president now if presidents could stay in office for an unlimited number of terms, as in Canada.

William Lyon MacKenzie King was Prime Minister of Canada for 22 years!

[KustmAce]

I think if there were unlimited terms, we would no longer be addressing our leader as "Mr. President" but rather "Herr Fuhrer" after a while.

[Thourun]

Yea unlimited terms are a bad idea even considering such celebrity presidents as Clinton.

[Heep]

But what about a perfect president (pretty well impossible, I know)? He makes world peace, makes the entire world rich enough to have everything they want, makes everyone happy?

Theoretically at least, true democracy should always put the best available leader into position. I know the perfect president idea is a bit out-there, but shouldn't the leader who represents the majority of the country's support be able to run until he falls out of favour with the majority?

Blasphemous though this may seem, I think the US could stand to be divided up into a couple, or few, different countries, such a New England, West Coast, Middle (judging by the electoral map anyways). Canada could certainly benefit from the same, as the needs and wants of different areas create huge clashes and compromises...

[duckied]

i wouldnt mind having presidents in office for more than four years. I would gladly have voted for clinton over bush. Franlkin Roosevelt was elected four consecutive terms before he died

[LotusDreams]

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.

[duckied]

Originally Posted by LotusDreams

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.

lmao

[Heep]

Originally Posted by LotusDreams

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.

Yeah I'm Canadian too, but I don't see a problem with the current system. I think if it were limited, the new candidates that would come along would still be old grumpy bastards, it's just they'd be former finance ministers () and the like instead of life-long Prime Ministerial candidates...

[LotusDreams]

mmm, corrupt former finance ministers.

Something you have to take into consideration is that, with limited terms, you spend your first term pussy-footing, trying to get some political objectives completed while at the same time always campaigning for re-election, while on your second term you can actual get done what you intended to to begin with, and don't need to worry about re-election. Whereas with unlimited terms, you're always campaigning.

[Savage Messiah]

They should get done what they intended in the 1st term and use that as campaigning for the 2nd tho...

[lazysmurff]

Originally Posted by Heep

But what about a perfect president (pretty well impossible, I know)? He makes world peace, makes the entire world rich enough to have everything they want, makes everyone happy?

then the president would have solved the worlds problems and its time for him to retire.

Originally Posted by Heep

Theoretically at least, true democracy should always put the best available leader into position.

in theory, democracy only puts the most popular person in office. read plato.

Originally Posted by Heep

Blasphemous though this may seem, I think the US could stand to be divided up into a couple, or few, different countries, such a New England, West Coast, Middle (judging by the electoral map anyways)

as long as texas gets to be its own country, im all for it. we're so much better than the rest of the nation.

[LotusDreams]

Originally Posted by 97CamaroRS

They should get done what they intended in the 1st term and use that as campaigning for the 2nd tho...

In theory man, in theory... But, honestly, can you tell me that's how they actually do it?

[Savage Messiah]

i used "should" for a reason .

Originally Posted by lazysmurff

in theory, democracy only puts the most popular person in office. read plato.

Yes, that is why Bush is here this term, but that theory didn't apply in 00

[Heep]

Originally Posted by lazysmurff

in theory, democracy only puts the most popular person in office. read plato.

True, but the most popular candidate should, in theory (this is getting out of control, haha), be the best available leader for the people...

[Thourun]

Hitler was real popular to germany at the time...