It goes by the term of the person to hold the office. And I don't mean when a person runs for reelection-type term. Cleveland was president, then he didn't run/lost (I don't remember what happened) then he became president again. Thus, Cleveland was elected and was the sitting president at two different times, which entitles him to be called the 22nd & 24th. If he would have done it all at the same time, then it would only be considered one spot.
I imagine this is also done to avoid confusion in history class.
2006-11-15 23:11:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by amg503 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Simply put Historians can't count. The math doesn't add up in my opinion.
We have had 43 different people take the oath of office for President. Now including President Obama.
We have some people server multiple terms including one person who has served two non-consecutive terms.
As of today we have had 43 Presidents, President Obama being the 43rd.
It is simply bad math to count one person as two Presidents.
Here are a few examples that illustrate the bad math.
If you are counting 10 apples and re-arrange one while counting. You don't count that one again, you simply say I already counted that apple. Order does NOT matter in quantity and you don't magically have another apple because it has been in multiple places.
If you are the coach of a football team and you replace your starting quarterback and then bring him back in later, he is NOT your third quarterback obviously. You have played two quarterbacks, not three.
Let's very hypothetically say we elect a President who develops seizures and passes out sometimes for as long as a day. We decide to have the Vice President take over every time so that the country has someone always in place. Now lets say that happens 50 times over four years. By the math of Historians, they would say we had fifty Presidents in those four years! The next President would be number 94! Obviously not going to happen but I think helps illustrate why it is bad math.
In an earlier post someone talked about how you count them. If you are counting the number of Presidents, you can't count the same guy twice. It will simply go Grover Cleveland is 22nd, Benjamin Harrison is 23rd, William McKinley 24th. Certainly you can mention that Grover served two non-consecutive terms if you want, or say Cleveland served again after Harrison. That doesn't make him two Presidents.
Thanks for the forum. We need to fix this.
2014-08-04 16:28:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
You're correct about Grover Cleveland, but I ask you... Which is worse?
A) Making Benjamin Harrison the 23rd President, then calling Cleveland the 22nd President when he served AFTER the 23rd President???
OR
B) Calling Grover Cleveland the 22nd and the 24th President because he held two nonconsecutive terms with another President between them?
I think B makes more sense. I hope you agree.
2006-11-16 01:06:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by TransyMAJ 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
If Cleveland was counted as the 22nd and 24th DIFFERENT person to hold the presidency- THAT truly would be bad math. Counting him as the 22nd and 24th president is less offensive. If it wasn't stated like that it would be even more confusing for people.
2006-11-15 22:59:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Vic 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Yes, we know about Cleveland but 43rd refers to the office of presidency rather than the person.
2006-11-15 23:45:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by mickyrisk 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i'll enable out the breath i have been retaining for the previous six and a component years and be very, very relieved. believe me... Jeb is basically not President. George W. has made particular of that. The timber' Presidential careers are over.
2016-10-16 09:07:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
good question....Cleveland I can see the point because the terms were not consecutive, In Pres. Bush's case, is there a new law passed again that we missed?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate Editing really: However you deserve a good answer:
it is the 43rd presidency my friend.
2006-11-15 22:55:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by dorianalways 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
because Republicans cant count Presidents..Only dollars!..
2006-11-15 23:48:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by paranthropus2001 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Cause gwb is an arsshooooooooooooooooooooooooole.
2006-11-15 22:57:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋