General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf he gets the nomination, should Joe Biden pledge to serve a single term in his acceptance speech?
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by NancyBlueINOklahoma (a host of the General Discussion forum).
I believe the only person to have ever done this was Teddy Roosevelt when running for re-election in 1904 (his 1st elected term, since he became President when McKinley was shot). TR won re-election in a landslide.
My thought is that it could play really well if Biden did this, especially if nothing about it leaked out and it was a surprise during his convention acceptance speech. He could say that he was going to focus for 4 years on re-establishing American institutions and foreign alliances in the wake of Trump and not on political considerations of getting re-elected. It could help alleviate concerns about his age if he made clear that he was only going to serve for one 4 year term.
I realize that lame ducks often have less political leverage, so there's that, but in terms of getting elected, I think it would be a positive. The public would have a clear choice between 4 more years of Trump or a 4 year single term of Biden. If it was a surprise announcement at the convention, it would get massive coverage and give him a huge bounce.
Ptah
(33,024 posts)Don't want a lame duck president and why run is you can only do a single.
AdamGG
(1,288 posts)and carry more downballot seats on his coattails?
tinrobot
(10,893 posts)Regardless, it would be a sign of weakness. Not good in an election.
LakeArenal
(28,813 posts)snowybirdie
(5,222 posts)Why tie one hand behind your back at the starting gate?
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)AdamGG
(1,288 posts)I view this as a post-primary scenario. The concept is not about competition among the primary participants. It is a possible strategy against the Republicans in the general election IF the current polling leader gets the nomination.
JHB
(37,158 posts)It's a hard-barrier rule, because otherwise there's just too much blurring and bleed-through, and people start fighting about why one was allowed and not another.
LakeArenal
(28,813 posts)But it was determined it was.
PJMcK
(22,025 posts)Should Senator Sanders or Senator Warren make similar pledges?
Sorry, AdamGG, but your question is simply silly.
wryter2000
(46,032 posts)I've heard this suggested elsewhere. I do agree it's a really dumb idea.
LakeArenal
(28,813 posts)Its not going to happen.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Literally no reason whatever for him to make such a promise.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)In either case, I'd rather go with re-electing President Sanders in 2024!!
Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!
Codeine
(25,586 posts)and should be limited to the appropriate subforum.
Why even bring this up.
No strings attached. This is America!
Jirel
(2,017 posts)Look, if he's truly planning to be a 1-term wonder, he needs to bow out of the race now. We do not need a lame-duck candidate or a lame duck president. Announcing it is a great way to immediately shoot himself in the foot. Further, announcing at the convention would be a horror story. At that point it would cause a crisis. This would be the absolute worst debacle imaginable.
MineralMan
(146,284 posts)bluestarone
(16,900 posts)HELL FUCKING NO!!!
LakeArenal
(28,813 posts)DFW
(54,335 posts)If such a scenario should present itself, let him say so after he has had time to settle into office, and let his VP establish herself (or himself, though I bet it would be a herself).
As for your getting your knuckles rapped for bending rules, hold your head up high whether your thread gets locked or not (and I'm hoping it won't). The Primaries board has predictably devolved from a forum for discussing the different positions of the various candidates to a sniping and/or cheerleading forum, where you either get zapped for supporting the "wrong" candidate, or inundated with endless polls that say what the poster wants them to, or a calendar of some candidate speaking to a screaming crowd of dozens at an Iowa pig-and-corn roast in a suburb of Sioux City. Their positions on education, environment, defense, commerce, foreign relations, immigration, water quality, etc. remain mostly in the background if not ignored altogether. Like Stills sang over 50 years ago: "Mostly say Hooray for our side."
Even if I didn't agree with its premise, your post asked a question worthy of rational discussion, so it definitely belonged anywhere BUT the Primaries board, as far as I'm concerned.
lpbk2713
(42,751 posts)But it does serve a purpose. It keeps the other forums from being cluttered with those Junior High School food fights. I can't recall the last time I was called to a jury to vote on a post was anything other than the Primaries Forum.
Owl
(3,641 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)awesomerwb1
(4,267 posts)Firestorm49
(4,030 posts)redstatebluegirl
(12,265 posts)SlogginThroughIt
(1,977 posts)getagrip_already
(14,697 posts)But after seeing trump, that's a really bad idea. I am even warming up to calling early elections.
But no to a single 4 year term.
Hekate
(90,633 posts)Jesus Christ on a Trailer Hitch.
Also, post this nonsense in the Primaries Forum
marybourg
(12,611 posts)nomination? What would be the point of that?
Response to AdamGG (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Ageism is raising its ugly head a lot these days.
Response to lunatica (Reply #35)
Name removed Message auto-removed
lunatica
(53,410 posts)maxsolomon
(33,284 posts)Thanks for your suggestions.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)It doesn't matter if this is post-primary, sorry
Please refer to this post:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1013&pid=9260