FDR was the only president that was voted in for 4 terms.People sa that if we didn't term limits on the President..he might become a dictator....I disagree.If the President didn't have any term limits put on him.and wanted to stay in office,this would keep him trying to please the public.As it is now,...first term.please the public....second term.fuck the public.
119978
I wish that more people were asking that question because I wish Bill was still our president. Take a look at every other country and how long their main leaders stay in power. The only term limits we need are in the senate and the congress so real people can get more involve with government. If we have a president the represents us well then why not keep him.
452247
Excellent question!  Right now, the Congress of the United States is full of people who have to run for office every two years.  That means there is very little time between one election and the next.  Too much time is spent raising funds for re-election that should be spent doing the business of the people.  \n\nI think four-year terms with a limit of two terms might be an answer.  Also, the political parties should spend more time explaining their positions on real issues and less time blasting the opposition.\n\nSome of the congressmen spend way too much time on so called fact finding trips to exotic places, and on Sunday news shows and participating in committee meetings that acomplish little more than providing  face time on cameras.
665939
You had to know that this question would bring the liberals out of the woodwork.  President Bush has done a great job. No president will please all of the people. I am amazed more at the hatred than anything else.  When I was reading the responses to your question, I found it interesting that many felt he had turned his back on them. When???   What do they want him to do?  Most importantly why not hold all of congress responsible for their votes and behavior, why pin it all on President Bush?  I do mean all of congress too, take a look at everyones voting records, I think some would be surprised.
412431
Yes, and because of his lies!\nTermlimits were put in place after the only 4 term president FDR
54462
This isn't the first time it has happened. John Quincy Adams (6th President) was the son of John Adams (2nd President). FDR and Teddy Roosevelt were 5th cousins. Should this be banned? Blood lines have nothing to do with it. They do not inherit the Presidency. They are elected to office. \n\nWhich brings up another point: Your comment "Due to the fact that the people dont actually elect the new president directly" is completely accurate. This is how it is outlined in the US Constitution. The President is actually elected by the States, not the people. It is up to the States to determine how they will vote.
500881
Bush did not run in this Election. It was not a Presidential election.  He cannot run in the next Presidential, because he is limited to 2 terms in office, and he is in his 2nd term now.
437391
It's between Lincoln and FDR because they led the country through its greatest crises and never backed down. A great president is measured through how he leads in tough times because tough times don't last, tough people do. Being a knowledgeable, strong commander in chief, and knowing how to manage spending by the government are also included. There are many debates about who is the greatest and most times your just choosing the lesser of two evils. These two are the obvious choices when you look at history. I would love to put JFK in here but the fact is he was taken from the people before he could fulfill his dream. You could argue the failures of Lincoln and Roosevelt as well but no one goes through this lifetime w/o failing. For the great ones, failure is why they succeed.
220499
He became president only because he is a master of elections he knows how to win elections, may be by hook or crook. just like his father. But truly speaking why would somebody deliberatly not do any work for the country, all presidents are same and bush is no exception.
242173
Actually more people probably care more about the President, than they do about the next Idol.The difference is you can only cast 1 vote for president,and you can cast as many votes for an Idol as you wish(unlimited).Which of course explains why they have figures like 64 million votes on Idol.Less people voting casting innumerable votes per individual as opposed to more people voting for president but limited to one vote.
618323
I think 2 shorter terms of 3 years would be wiser.  The present president is clearly a madman - I know the entire country can't be held responsible for his actions (as well as lack of actions in times of crises), but I just cannot comprehend how this could have happened!
637195
Already been answered.  Consecutiveness has nothing to do with it.  Read the Constitution. 2 terms max.
277145
HOLD IT!!!! THIS GUY IS ONTO SOMETHING!!!\nyou have a point dear Asker. \nIn a country like the United States, that is so institutionalized, it is true that the president does not make a huge effect. this, in part, is the reason why the number of voters is decreasing. For example, in a dictatorship or monarchy, the next ruler could determine your whole lifestyle.. from where you will work, what you will watch, to the food (if any) you will eat. \n\nBeing so institutionalized and structured creates such a system that could take care of itself. The president on his own, or with the administration, has limited power, so he cannot really turn your life around.\n\nYou have an excellent point asker, but different administrations do have different policies that indirectly do effect all of us, whether emotionally or tangibly.
153511
Actually, the 22nd Amendment (which limits presidents to two full terms in office) had little to do with senility or political concerns, and more for the concern that America would end up with a "benevolent dictator" who would wield great power that he or she gathered over time.
247170
Bush is concerned about the American people...in terms of what they think of him. Of course, since he has no chance in hell of re-election (amendment limiting the number of terms a president can serve to two), he might as well get real and stop trying to bs us with his sucky speeches and vague promises. Pretty much, I think he is trying to finish out this term without getting assassinated - that seems to be his goal. Also, he must perform well because all the eyes of the world are on him.
30224
The question is a bit ambiguous. Any democratic government has rules defined by It's Constitution. So it all depends on which federal government you are speaking of. The U.S Constitution for example calls for elections every two years. There isn't a prescribed method of not having an election, which would only be conceivable in a time of such great conflict/disaster that the president would be forced to suspend the entire constitution and declare martial law. This is virtually an impossibility, such events would be so terrific it probably destory the U.S, or any other government as we know it.
4939
Hey gang, I don't think the Constitution allows for a recall election.  I think only states have recall election provisions, and then only some states.  I do think, however, that the states could pass a constitutional amendment making the President answerable to the people for his crimes and come clean with all available records, but can you really imagine such a thing happening, with our f'ed up media?\n\nAs I see it, the only ways to get rid of this President are to a) rise up in a mass, anti-Constitutionally elected government revolution, or b)elect a Democratic majority to the House and then successfully impeach both Bush and Cheney simultaneously, thus giving the Presidency to the Speaker of the House, who would be a Democrat.  To my mind, that's the only real scenario that works.  I suppose if we had a different media and more active populace, a new party could split the vote, and all hell could break loose, but I don't think we're going to see a repeat of what happened in 1860 and Lincoln and the Republican Party takeover of the White House.  So that leaves us with Democrats taking control and actually acting on something the people want, which is impeachment.  And if impeachment isn't acted upon, this country sinks deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole.
206184
I guess FDR was the best President.  But in modern times. America never had it so good as when Bill Clinton was President. Forget all the Monica stuff. The country was in a great state.