Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

misterspokes t1_itvqp38 wrote

Reply to comment by Proof-Variation7005 in Young voters are so important by mooscaretaker

It "works" in the Executive because the entire job is managing a legacy bureaucracy and most of the people who get into the position have met and interacted with most of the ones that can't easily be replaced.

4

Proof-Variation7005 t1_itvw791 wrote

I'd almost argue that it's not even great in the executive branch. It was an overcorrection from a wildly popular president that couldn't be unseated until he died in office and a wildly unpopular vice president took over.

To me, it's just inherently undemocratic to automatically disqualify a choice that might be the most popular one. I could see the logic a little better for a governor but for the U.S. Presidency, most people would not even want to keep going after 2 full terms. Maybe if you had the double-whammy of a world war and a great depression again, I could see someone not wanting to abandon ship in crisis, but that job would burn most people out.

If you look at the 2 term presidents after FDR, none of them even would've tried to go for a 3rd term if the option was there. It's a self correcting problem federally because that job has stress factors none of us can imagine.

2

misterspokes t1_itvws61 wrote

Indeed, but it's still acceptable in the position. Expanding the house and instituting rotating benches in the Federal Court system would go a long way in fixing the things we claim we want term limits for.

2