General Discussion

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

2. No. I oppose all artificial term limits.

Fri Jan 29, 2016, 03:40 PM

Jan 2016

If the candidate wants to run, and the voters elect that candidate, there's no reason to forbid them from taking office.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

47 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Congressional productivity - Would you be in favor of a single term limit for all congresspeople? [View all] MadDAsHell Jan 2016 OP

No. Term limits are a horrible idea for legislative bodies. phleshdef Jan 2016 #1

You make a good point, but money is much harder to control. MadDAsHell Jan 2016 #3

I'd rather take my chances with controlling campaign finance than have no-nothings writing bills. phleshdef Jan 2016 #17

Agree emphatically. BUT, Hortensis Jan 2016 #34

That dam has been opened atreides1 Jan 2016 #6

That's how I feel. nt MadDAsHell Jan 2016 #10

And I feel that is nonsense. There are 150 MILLION Hortensis Jan 2016 #35

Then the money has to start coming from US... Volaris Jan 2016 #26

California's experience illustrates this. KamaAina Jan 2016 #15

I like the governors having term limits and it doesn't seem to have any negative outcomes yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #22

I don't see why it matters if they are serving those they represent. phleshdef Jan 2016 #24

They might have been, once upon a time. Unchecked money is now a "horribler" idea, though villager Jan 2016 #30

No. I oppose all artificial term limits. jeff47 Jan 2016 #2

Term limits are a useful protection against elected autocrats and cults of personality. Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2016 #13

Then make the case that the elected official is an autocrat jeff47 Jan 2016 #19

Not so easy if they control the media, sometimes. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2016 #31

There is a way to end terms, it's called an election. That's how democracies work. immoderate Jan 2016 #4

+ struggle4progress Jan 2016 #42

I don't think that's the best answer to the corruption in DC 99th_Monkey Jan 2016 #5

Agreed, but how? In what area of American life (or politics) have we ever successfully... MadDAsHell Jan 2016 #14

Scrapping CU is a start, then move towards public financing 99th_Monkey Jan 2016 #16

Oh My God No! SheilaT Jan 2016 #7

No ... as others have said, we already have term limits etherealtruth Jan 2016 #8

No. Why would I want MORE of them becoming lobbyists? n/t Orsino Jan 2016 #9

No. It was disastorous in California. Xolodno Jan 2016 #11

100% publicly funded elections with zero term limits. LanternWaste Jan 2016 #12

Do you mean that it would be illegal for third parties to spend their own money Nye Bevan Jan 2016 #20

I mean precisely and exactly what you want it to mean... LanternWaste Jan 2016 #23

"100% publicly funded elections" can mean a few different things. Nye Bevan Jan 2016 #25

^^That's your boy Lantern's MO. nt MadDAsHell Jan 2016 #27

Welcome back to DU! LanternWaste Jan 2016 #37

Them asking for clarification would have been in order LanternWaste Jan 2016 #36

There may not be a shortage of people eligible to serve....... WillowTree Jan 2016 #18

I'm not even in favor of term limits for the presidency. Nye Bevan Jan 2016 #21

As far as the idea of term limits, Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #28

I'm Not a Fan of Term Limit SDJay Jan 2016 #29

Nope. Iggo Jan 2016 #32

Absolutely not oberliner Jan 2016 #33

I wouldn't limit it to one term Aerows Jan 2016 #38

Hell no. It hands all the real power over to professional staff and lobbyists... hunter Jan 2016 #39

No, I am sorry, I realize why people ask that because there jwirr Jan 2016 #40

No. I want people who know what they're doing from experience lunatica Jan 2016 #41

I have long favored term limits. But that one downside you cite is HUGE Stinky The Clown Jan 2016 #43

Absolutely not. ljm2002 Jan 2016 #44

Nope, mostly I see what has happened in Mexico nadinbrzezinski Jan 2016 #45

Although I am on "soft ignore" former9thward Jan 2016 #47

We already have term limits. They're called elections. nt Bigmack Jan 2016 #46