He could cite the precedent of FDR remaining in office for 4 terms while the nation was at war. Especially if the U.S. is involved in a war with Iran? Any thoughts?
2007-02-02 05:51:35 · 17 answers · asked by bigstarwarsgeek 2 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Go check your history. FDR was ELECTED 4 times. The Constitution did not limit Presidentialterms at that time. Bush will be out of the White House after two terms. I'm delighted he will be gone.
2007-02-02 05:57:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
The 22nd Amendment to the constitution prohibits President Bush from remaining in office longer than two terms. There would have to be another amendment to the constitution to allow him to stay in office longer (regardless of any other circumstances such as the war he is leading us to in Iran).
The 22nd Amendment was ratified in reaction to FDR being in office for 4 terms. Not because he did a poor job, but because it was the founding fathers intent, though not specifically spelled out, that Presidents have a limited length in office.
2007-02-02 06:10:18 · answer #2 · answered by Tom 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The only ways Bush could keep himself in office are:
1) He orders the country under martial law before the inaugration allowing to stay in office util martial law is lifted.
2) He becomes a vice presidential canidate and they get elected and the then president steps down thus giving Bush another term.
Both will never happen.
2007-02-02 06:03:58 · answer #3 · answered by frankenberries 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I dont think a Constitutional change is in the cards for W. But, assuming his health is good and he's not forced from office for some other reason, he should remain President for about 2 week into 2009.
2007-02-02 06:00:58 · answer #4 · answered by Jeff G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you kidding? Why would anybody want him to stay regardless of the situation?
He has made so many mistakes and told too many half-truths and lies during his term.
Even if you support him, you have to realize that we have no friends, no credibility and no foreign policy with him. Any reasonable person can see the damage he has done to the US, and our relations.
It's honestly not a Democratic/Republican issue anymore. Bush and his office have very special interests, that represent a small number of Americans. Most Republicans see that and have distanced themselves from him.
We need someone in office that can reach out. We will never prosper without the support of our allies. John McCain appears to have this talent. I would say the same for Obama. Folks like Gulliani and Hillary Clinton are not the answer in these trying times.
2007-02-02 06:08:05 · answer #5 · answered by Clint H 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Sure. "Vote Fascist for a third glorious decade", to quote from "Red Dwarf".
Chicken George could claim, "I wasn't elected in 2000, I was appointed by the court, so it doesn't count! And in 2004, the vote machines were rigged - I didn't really get more votes - so I wasn't elected then either! That means I can run for two more terms!"
Either that, or the ReThugnicans declare a police state.
"This would a lot easier if this were a dictatorship...just as long as I'm the dictator."
- Chicken George, during the 2000 presidential campaign
.
2007-02-02 06:13:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
There was no term limit when FDR was prez. Matter of fact, it was his presidency that created the impetus to limit presidential terms.
2007-02-02 05:56:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why he implemented many of the Immigration reform bill's policies by executive order instead of waiting on a congressional vote?
2016-05-24 05:36:57 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If he were even allowed to run for another term I think that he would most likely lose if running against a hamster with mange.
2007-02-02 06:02:41 · answer #9 · answered by Ricky J. 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope, the constitution has changed since then. I think you're just scare mongering.
2007-02-02 05:59:58 · answer #10 · answered by John 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋