Given that the presidency is a marathon, that the second term is known for lethargic policy and the obligatory scandal and that the second term is really just a reward for a good first term, should we consider limiting our presidents to one term? I am not calling for a law here. And I do recognize that getting your guy into the presidency is hard enough that keeping him in for a second (when certainly that is easier) seems like a good idea. But isn't there some way we could change the tradition? (e.g. insert the VP as a candidate for the second term, thereby carrying the momentum but bringing fresh ideas and people.)
That is enough run on sentences for one morning. Discuss among yourselves.
That's be great. Then we could elect a lame duck and have all the bad stuff in the first term.
ReplyDelete