Presidents are already limited to two terms only. So they only face reelection once.
It's probably more urgent to get an idea like this implemented for Congress, where people like Nancy Pelosi end up serving for 30 or 40 years.
I think reelection should be harder than it is, for pretty much everyone.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Presidents are already limited to two terms only.  So they only face reelection once.
It's probably more urgent to get an idea like this implemented for Congress, where people like Nancy Pelosi end up serving for 30 or 40 years.
I think reelection should be harder than it is, for pretty much everyone.

When you live in districts with battered wife syndrome,  that leads to the reelection of these career politicians. The district's most of these people lead are total wrecks.

---

Presidents are already limited to two terms only.  So they only face reelection once.
It's probably more urgent to get an idea like this implemented for Congress, where people like Nancy Pelosi end up serving for 30 or 40 years.
I think reelection should be harder than it is, for pretty much everyone.

It would take a convention of states to amend the constitution and limit the terms of congressman.

---

Presidents are already limited to two terms only.  So they only face reelection once.
It's probably more urgent to get an idea like this implemented for Congress, where people like Nancy Pelosi end up serving for 30 or 40 years.
I think reelection should be harder than it is, for pretty much everyone.

It would take a convention of states to amend the constitution and limit the terms of congressman.

...so let's get to work?
I don't think strict term limits would be wise.  They haven't helped Florida's legislature.
If someone is actually consistently doing a good job, they should not be fired just because they reached a certain tenure in office.
But they shouldn't be able to just stay in on the basis of having more name recognition than any newcomer, which is the way it is now.  They should have to run against "no", rather than "no name goober no one's ever heard of".

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The only reason an incumbent may have an advantage is because they have already won an election. They have earned the attention. Also plenty of incumbents have been voted out.

Plus you are forcing people to make a decision on the incumbent in the middle of their term in order to allow time for campaigns and a lot could change over that time. You are limiting the time to implement their agenda. You are also forcing the incumbent to have to spend time dealing with the distraction of not just one but two elections during their term.

You are also putting the incumbents party at a disadvantage because they have to wait for the yes no election before they can start to come up with an election strategy while the other party will have a few years head start.

On top of that, you would be setting up a situation where you would have three separate elections to determine who is president.

I think the current primary and general election is enough. I think your proposal is actually kind of silly based on silly presumptions.

The incumbent could start campaigning to win the yes/no vote as soon as they win their first election.
If the incumbent wins the "yes/no" vote, there is no challenger. The incumbent gets another term, the end.
  If the incumbent loses, the incumbent goes home.  Either way he only has one election to think about, and two or four years to prepare for it.
As for us, yes, we would probably have three elections to determine who the president will be. I don't think that's a big deal, but if you think it's a big deal, the two elections we have already could become a single election with instant runoff voting, were you mark your ballot with who is your first choice, your second choice, your third choice etc.

So you are suggesting the President spend pretty much all his time in office campaigning.

If you can't see how idiotic that is then I don't know what to tell you.

---

The incumbent could start campaigning to win the yes/no vote as soon as they win their first election.
If the incumbent wins the "yes/no" vote, there is no challenger. The incumbent gets another term, the end.
  If the incumbent loses, the incumbent goes home.  Either way he only has one election to think about, and two or four years to prepare for it.
As for us, yes, we would probably have three elections to determine who the president will be. I don't think that's a big deal, but if you think it's a big deal, the two elections we have already could become a single election with instant runoff voting, were you mark your ballot with who is your first choice, your second choice, your third choice etc.

So you are suggesting the President spend pretty much all his time in office campaigning.

If you can't see how idiotic that is then I don't know what to tell you.

To be fair, it's exactly what Obama did.

---

So you are suggesting the President spend pretty much all his time in office campaigning.

If you can't see how idiotic that is then I don't know what to tell you.

To be fair, it's exactly what Obama did.

Explains why Mikeysez likes the idea.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The incumbent could start campaigning to win the yes/no vote as soon as they win their first election.
If the incumbent wins the "yes/no" vote, there is no challenger. The incumbent gets another term, the end.
  If the incumbent loses, the incumbent goes home.  Either way he only has one election to think about, and two or four years to prepare for it.
As for us, yes, we would probably have three elections to determine who the president will be. I don't think that's a big deal, but if you think it's a big deal, the two elections we have already could become a single election with instant runoff voting, were you mark your ballot with who is your first choice, your second choice, your third choice etc.

So you are suggesting the President spend pretty much all his time in office campaigning.

If you can't see how idiotic that is then I don't know what to tell you.

Donald Trump filed his campaign papers for 2020 on inauguration day 2017. 

Neither Obama nor Trump spent all their time campaigning.  But they both at least laid the groundwork right away.
That wouldn't change.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So you are suggesting the President spend pretty much all his time in office campaigning.

If you can't see how idiotic that is then I don't know what to tell you.

Donald Trump filed his campaign papers for 2020 on inauguration day 2017. 

Neither Obama nor Trump spent all their time campaigning.  But they both at least laid the groundwork right away.
That wouldn't change.

Filing paperwork is not running an active campaign.

One takes minutes the other takes months, or in your plan, years.

---

Trump has held rallies consistently since his election. He's been raising money since he took office. Name a President in recent times that hasn't. It's part of the job. Not sure what you guys are trying to argue here.

---

Trump has held rallies consistently since his election. He's been raising money since he took office. Name a President in recent times that hasn't. It's part of the job. Not sure what you guys are trying to argue here.

Only difference is over 60,000 people ALWAYS want to see and hear Trump.

Other incumbents were lucky to get 10,000

---

Some things just are. Incumbency is incumbency. Romney tried to hide and just be the "no" option. Obama won re-election despite every historical tailwind blowing against him. You need a candidate with a compelling case and momentum to get voters to go against an experienced candidate even if they dont like him.

As for getting 38 states to agree on something... u start. Well wait.

---

1.  I think you are still bitter over 2016.  2.  There is still an Electoral College.  3.  I think you have finally accepted that Trump will win again in 2020  4.  See point 1

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

It would take a convention of states to amend the constitution and limit the terms of congressman.

...so let's get to work?
I don't think strict term limits would be wise.  They haven't helped Florida's legislature.
If someone is actually consistently doing a good job, they should not be fired just because they reached a certain tenure in office.
But they shouldn't be able to just stay in on the basis of having more name recognition than any newcomer, which is the way it is now.  They should have to run against "no", rather than "no name goober no one's ever heard of".

So President Trump should be allowed to remain in office for more than 8 years?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Some things just are.  Incumbency is incumbency.  Romney tried to hide and just be the "no" option.  Obama won re-election despite every historical tailwind blowing against him.  You need a candidate with a compelling case and momentum to get voters to go against an experienced candidate even if they dont like him.  

As for getting 38 states to agree on something...  u start.  Well wait.

Mitt Romney believes his messiah wrote his Bible from golden tablets he could only read in total darkness..

Mormons are morons.

---

...so let's get to work?
I don't think strict term limits would be wise.  They haven't helped Florida's legislature.
If someone is actually consistently doing a good job, they should not be fired just because they reached a certain tenure in office.
But they shouldn't be able to just stay in on the basis of having more name recognition than any newcomer, which is the way it is now.  They should have to run against "no", rather than "no name goober no one's ever heard of".

So President Trump should be allowed to remain in office for more than 8 years?

Oh gosh no.
That sentence applies only to lawmakers.
Presidents should only get two terms regardless.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So President Trump should be allowed to remain in office for more than 8 years?

Oh gosh no.
That sentence applies only to lawmakers.
Presidents should only get two terms regardless.

So why should there be a term limit on a President but not for do nothing "lawmakers"?  Look at how long some of these "representatives" have been in office.  Serving in Congress wasn't intended to be a career, yet many have made it their career and look at what they have (not)done.  Name one single signature piece of legislation proposed by someone like Nancy Pelosi (been in office since 1987) that actually became law.  What exactly has she accomplished for the American people?  What exactly has she done for her district?

Her district is pretty much a [BLEEP] hole (quite literally).

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Oh gosh no.
That sentence applies only to lawmakers.
Presidents should only get two terms regardless.

So why should there be a term limit on a President but not for do nothing "lawmakers"?  Look at how long some of these "representatives" have been in office.  Serving in Congress wasn't intended to be a career, yet many have made it their career and look at what they have (not)done.  Name one single signature piece of legislation proposed by someone like Nancy Pelosi (been in office since 1987) that actually became law.  What exactly has she accomplished for the American people?  What exactly has she done for her district?

Her district is pretty much a [BLEEP] hole (quite literally).

It wasn't supposed to be a year-round occupation either.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Oh gosh no.
That sentence applies only to lawmakers.
Presidents should only get two terms regardless.

So why should there be a term limit on a President but not for do nothing "lawmakers"?  Look at how long some of these "representatives" have been in office.  Serving in Congress wasn't intended to be a career, yet many have made it their career and look at what they have (not)done.  Name one single signature piece of legislation proposed by someone like Nancy Pelosi (been in office since 1987) that actually became law.  What exactly has she accomplished for the American people?  What exactly has she done for her district?

Her district is pretty much a [BLEEP] hole (quite literally).

If you make it harder for her to get re-elected, make her have to run against "no", I think that would take care of it. She probably wouldn't have made it 32 years if she had to get a "yes" majority 16 times.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So you live in the land of the FREE and home of the brave and have a [BLEEP] ton of rights and privileges but that’s not good enough for you? You want to make it harder for those that have it to you to keep giving that to you solely based on their political party/hate for them? Yeah, seems like a great way to go about things.

---