as a small gripe with the comparison, Zelensky holds power by declaration of martial law suspending elections (and ejection/assassination/incarceration of opposition.)
To clarify, I don't think I compared the current approach of Trump (changing the constitution) with Zelensky. I compared it with Putin, who did pretty much the same - changed the constitution to stay in power. And to Hitler, in principle, using the nefarious change of laws to become an official, lawful dictator.
With Zelensky, I wrote that his approach is related to simply stopping elections using the war as an excuse. I then said for Trump to use that way, he couldn't use war but a "emergency declaration" to do so. So, I never compared the current Trump approach with the current Zelensky approach.
Thanks for filling me in about the history - as I admitted in the article - I did not know the history.
Ultimately, I think it should be up to all Americans to decide if they want to extend from 8 years to 12 years. It is simply a higher reward/risk question. More rewards with a good president and more risks with a lousy president.
In theory, a lousy president wouldn't get re-elected.
But I think, with the massive censorship and propaganda capabilities of the USA these days, it is almost guaranteed that the existing powers will stay in power for 12 years, no matter how good or bad the policies are. Look at Putin. And from there, it is a slippery slope to extend to four terms, five terms...
Either people believe that power always corrupts, or they don't. If they believe it, 12 years or longer is a terrible idea.
But my feeling is that most people crave "stability".
They rather chose "bad stability" over the instability required to make meaningful changes in society. Meaningful changes only come with a change in government.
I also believe that people are deliberately conditioned that way, going through all the institutions and the conditioning of their parents that keep them that way because it makes them easier to rule. This conditioning to crave a stabilizing authority has been going on for centuries.
It is what it is. I have no idea why I am different, and love change so much. I see so much squashed potential in the masses - and exploitation by the elites in countless ways.
I hope I soon get weary of moving mountains around and retreat into a private, secluded life knowing that I tried and failed.
I can agree with most of that. especially how they'd stay in power 12 years based on manipulation. Senile Security State Joe is the first I've seen who overreached ridiculously and blatantly enough to get kicked to the curb hard instead of taking the available 8 years…
personally I like the idea of term limits being as short as possible. it's too easy for politicians to do whatever they feel like while ignoring their constituents, so the less time they have available for that the better in my opinion. looking at the historical record of them, the odds of a “good” president being installed are next to zero, so no way I personally would want any of them to be around for a third term.
Franklin D. Roosevelt served four terms as President of the United States, being elected in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944. He is the longest-serving U.S. president and the only one to have served more than two terms. His unprecedented four terms led to the ratification of the 22nd Amendment in 1951, which now limits presidents to two elected terms.
Yes, they saw the light and realised that a president in power - now more than ever - has all the means to manipulate the masses to keep him in power. Hence, the 22nd amendment. There is some wisdom in it.
Not good to keep the same dictator in office forever. Can you imagine The Dummy ( JB) in the black house for another 20 years? Even if he were to die, his A/i clone would take over and no one would know.
Fair enough - no WW II or other emergency going on at the moment, though, that justifies this move. SomeDude checked, and two terms were not a binding rule until 1950 when it was added to the constitution with the 22nd amendment - possibly caused by the extra term by Roosevelt. People saw the danger and put a stop to it. Before 1950 it was only an unspoken rule.
You seem to forget the US constitution was only changed in 1947 to limit presidents to 2 terms. FDR was elected to 4. While I think Trump would be too old for a third term don't you think the public should decide? Your argument falls apart because those other leaders you mention simply made the changes themselves without the voters' consent. Truman, Reagan, and Clinton all at one time or another thought the 22nd amendment was stupid. I would argue a cognitive test would be much more important than term limits, especially in the senate and congress where members stay much past their prime.
It's unlikely that Ogles is a true Trump believer. I doubt Trump is behind this although he undoubtedly loves it. I wonder who Ogles has been meeting with behind the scenes. The people who are really behind this. What powerful/wealthy people are currently benefitting from Trump as president, and would love to have him in for eight or more years rather than just four.
Interesting angle I haven’t thought of. So you think it is peolpe that profit from Trump, for example Big Oil, Big AI and Big mRNA that push this? That’s a possibility. He would be 82 starting the 3rd term and mighr turn into another senile Biden - even Trump isn’t beyond getting old and all the magical pills can only do so much.
Wouldn’t that be another reason to oppose it? Bu, on the hand, who cares if we oppose it or not. ;-)
There are legal means to amend the U.S. Constitution. The problem arises when activist judges ‘interpret’ things in there that do not belong, such as Roe Vs. Wade.
Franklin D. Roosevelt served four terms as President of the United States, being elected in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944. He is the longest-serving U.S. president and the only one to have served more than two terms. His unprecedented four terms led to the ratification of the 22nd Amendment in 1951, which now limits presidents to two elected terms.
as a small gripe with the comparison, Zelensky holds power by declaration of martial law suspending elections (and ejection/assassination/incarceration of opposition.)
a slightly bigger gripe is that the two term limit was not in the constitution (was an unspoken rule) until about 1950 with the 22nd amendment... passed because FDR held on for FOUR terms of being voted in. https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/fdrs-third-term-decision-and-the-22nd-amendment
otherwise, yeah, I'd prefer the existing term limit remain at 2. and set term limits for Congress etc while at it.
Hi, and thank you for your comment.
To clarify, I don't think I compared the current approach of Trump (changing the constitution) with Zelensky. I compared it with Putin, who did pretty much the same - changed the constitution to stay in power. And to Hitler, in principle, using the nefarious change of laws to become an official, lawful dictator.
With Zelensky, I wrote that his approach is related to simply stopping elections using the war as an excuse. I then said for Trump to use that way, he couldn't use war but a "emergency declaration" to do so. So, I never compared the current Trump approach with the current Zelensky approach.
Thanks for filling me in about the history - as I admitted in the article - I did not know the history.
Ultimately, I think it should be up to all Americans to decide if they want to extend from 8 years to 12 years. It is simply a higher reward/risk question. More rewards with a good president and more risks with a lousy president.
In theory, a lousy president wouldn't get re-elected.
But I think, with the massive censorship and propaganda capabilities of the USA these days, it is almost guaranteed that the existing powers will stay in power for 12 years, no matter how good or bad the policies are. Look at Putin. And from there, it is a slippery slope to extend to four terms, five terms...
Either people believe that power always corrupts, or they don't. If they believe it, 12 years or longer is a terrible idea.
But my feeling is that most people crave "stability".
They rather chose "bad stability" over the instability required to make meaningful changes in society. Meaningful changes only come with a change in government.
I also believe that people are deliberately conditioned that way, going through all the institutions and the conditioning of their parents that keep them that way because it makes them easier to rule. This conditioning to crave a stabilizing authority has been going on for centuries.
It is what it is. I have no idea why I am different, and love change so much. I see so much squashed potential in the masses - and exploitation by the elites in countless ways.
I hope I soon get weary of moving mountains around and retreat into a private, secluded life knowing that I tried and failed.
thanks for the clarification.
I can agree with most of that. especially how they'd stay in power 12 years based on manipulation. Senile Security State Joe is the first I've seen who overreached ridiculously and blatantly enough to get kicked to the curb hard instead of taking the available 8 years…
personally I like the idea of term limits being as short as possible. it's too easy for politicians to do whatever they feel like while ignoring their constituents, so the less time they have available for that the better in my opinion. looking at the historical record of them, the odds of a “good” president being installed are next to zero, so no way I personally would want any of them to be around for a third term.
Franklin D. Roosevelt served four terms as President of the United States, being elected in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944. He is the longest-serving U.S. president and the only one to have served more than two terms. His unprecedented four terms led to the ratification of the 22nd Amendment in 1951, which now limits presidents to two elected terms.
Yes, they saw the light and realised that a president in power - now more than ever - has all the means to manipulate the masses to keep him in power. Hence, the 22nd amendment. There is some wisdom in it.
I feel ya.
Thanks for the shout out Marcus! Great read!
Not good to keep the same dictator in office forever. Can you imagine The Dummy ( JB) in the black house for another 20 years? Even if he were to die, his A/i clone would take over and no one would know.
His surname is Ogles.
Thank you - corrected.
Why do you say a paid membership is $30. A year shows as $49 when I look.
I didn’t think about it and will add $US in the future.
Sorry, it is an American Web-Site and all prices are in US Dollars.
Ah, I forgot that were all supposed to live American ;)
During WW2, Roosevelt (FDR) served an additional term.
Reverse / Inverse Totalitarianism (I forgot correct term) doesn't need a figurehead.
Fair enough - no WW II or other emergency going on at the moment, though, that justifies this move. SomeDude checked, and two terms were not a binding rule until 1950 when it was added to the constitution with the 22nd amendment - possibly caused by the extra term by Roosevelt. People saw the danger and put a stop to it. Before 1950 it was only an unspoken rule.
You seem to forget the US constitution was only changed in 1947 to limit presidents to 2 terms. FDR was elected to 4. While I think Trump would be too old for a third term don't you think the public should decide? Your argument falls apart because those other leaders you mention simply made the changes themselves without the voters' consent. Truman, Reagan, and Clinton all at one time or another thought the 22nd amendment was stupid. I would argue a cognitive test would be much more important than term limits, especially in the senate and congress where members stay much past their prime.
Good point. I discuss that exact point - people deciding - in another comment here. Thank you.
Therefore “the last president” 😎
It's unlikely that Ogles is a true Trump believer. I doubt Trump is behind this although he undoubtedly loves it. I wonder who Ogles has been meeting with behind the scenes. The people who are really behind this. What powerful/wealthy people are currently benefitting from Trump as president, and would love to have him in for eight or more years rather than just four.
Interesting angle I haven’t thought of. So you think it is peolpe that profit from Trump, for example Big Oil, Big AI and Big mRNA that push this? That’s a possibility. He would be 82 starting the 3rd term and mighr turn into another senile Biden - even Trump isn’t beyond getting old and all the magical pills can only do so much.
Wouldn’t that be another reason to oppose it? Bu, on the hand, who cares if we oppose it or not. ;-)
There are legal means to amend the U.S. Constitution. The problem arises when activist judges ‘interpret’ things in there that do not belong, such as Roe Vs. Wade.
Franklin D. Roosevelt served four terms as President of the United States, being elected in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944. He is the longest-serving U.S. president and the only one to have served more than two terms. His unprecedented four terms led to the ratification of the 22nd Amendment in 1951, which now limits presidents to two elected terms.