what is wrong in someone being elected president for life?

Answer 1

Why not elect a president for life? At least that way, we'd know for sure who is the dictator. As it stands, we have little information on who may be manipulating the political process behind the scenes.

Further, the president presently only rents the country. He or she will have to return it after four or eight years. For this reason, a president may try to maximize its current income. A president elected for life may be more interested in the long-term wealth of the country. (Think Medicare, Social Security and so forth.)

[For the record, I would like to see less emphasis on our *great* leaders - whether elected every four years or for life. Either way, they exercise way too much control over our lives.]

Answer 2

The same thing that was wrong with it when it was tried in other countries and cultures throughout human history. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

At the time of the formation of the U.S. Constitution, the young country called the United States had already been through a period of being dominated by a ruler who maintained a lifetime of power. They believed it to be very important to make certain that no such thing could ever happen in the U.S.

Answer 3

See the life of Fidel Castro of Cuba or Saddam of Iraq or life of Egyptian Presidents and last but not the least the Presidents of Pakistan, till today and Bangladesh prior to 1990.
What you learn, form the history of these countries, is the answer to your question.

Answer 4

If you remove democracy then what you have is a dictator. Take Iraq for example- to much power for one man. He lead with an iron fist. He was a dictator. This is an example of why we have democracy. Vote in and if he/she is tearing up the country impeach them. Put a king and queen in place then you have a royal family that cannot be removed and the same bloodline and same ideas follow for centuries. I like having a democracy but the two term thing needs to go. I agree with one of the other post's. If they are doing a good job, let the people vote them back in.

Answer 5

Eliminates an important check and balance. Bad presidents get voted out their second term, like Carter for example.

Were it a lifetime appointment, Carter might still be president, and the U.S.S.R. might have won the Cold War.

Answer 6

if someone gets elected for president for life then that person is not a president anymore, that person would be a dictator

Answer 7

A great deal is wrong.

There is a statement by Lord Acton that "If power corrupts then absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Too long in power may lead to corruption. The person in power probably will not care about what people say and therefore will tend to act without public support.

Times change. The government may become too conservative since the office holder will remain in power for a long time and his views will probably not change..

Answer 8

Because change is good. If one person remained in power with no chance of removal it would probably corrupt them or affect their ability to lead.

And not to mention, I don't think anyone, anywhere—could handle the stress of being president for a lifetime. It would be just too much..

Answer 9

Nothin really. The this country is going an Imperial Government is sounding more and more satisfying. With the Future Leaders of the Free World turning out to be a bunch of Dim Witted Idiots, I'll take an Emperor any day !

Answer 10

Then what if the people no longer want that person as president?

Then we would be stuck with him for the rest of our lives.
Then what happens when he passes away? Do we then vote again?....

To many questions to be answered.

I like voting every 4 years on president. I then know my vote matters.