2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Elizabeth Warren [View all]cascadiance
(19,537 posts)It is the Republicans (and the 1%ers who are NOT politicians that don't want to have to deal with them as much, AND who would then control the "experience" of Washington with the lobbyists still being there) that want to get rid of term limits.
I'm not saying that this is a divisive issue on the hill. Term limits is one that members of both parties in office want to avoid, since they are dependent on it not being in place to continue their jobs (unless they've already been given promises for a "revolving door" job by a lobbyist already).
But it is the Republicans in general (the non-politician voters out there that are continually dumb enough to continue to vote for Republicans) that swallow the 1% corporatist elements efforts to steer them towards using term limits as a solution to "get rid of that nasty government that Rush hates" that we should be looking at. It is that sense of frustration (even by some in the middle and some Democrats that have been looking at term limits as a solution) that will not be happy and be reinforced with their stances on term limits if they see the DLC continue to control what the Democratic Party provides as its choices for the Democrats to vote on for nomination). That will keep them from voting for a candidate like Clinton, but might have some of them vote for someone like Warren who they might see as an outsider wanting changes away from that corporate corruption, even if they themselves aren't "far left" as so many that try to dismiss Warren as the only voters she can appeal to.