Should there be term limits for elected officials?

[minionofmidas]

the point I was making is that, when you follow a line of logic down its road far enough, you sometimes hit a paradox. 

Not a very original point.

[Franzl]

America is a republic and not a democracy. There are limits on power. The majority doesn't always rule.

This idiotic distinction between "republic" and "democracy" is an exclusively American thing. It also unfortunately shows that you don't know the meaning of the words.

Democracy is when the supreme power of government rests in the hands of the voters alone.

A republic is where the supreme power of government rests in the hands of certain citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen either directly or indirectly by those citizens.

I do know the meaning of the words. There's a pretty fundamental between the two terms. And I assume that the question pertains to the U.S. because this site is centered mostly around American politics and elections.

Just because a good deal of people in the U.S. use the words this way, doesn't mean it's correct or makes any sense.

"Democracy" and "Republican" do not contradict each other. "Democracy" means rule by the people, whether direct or indirect. "Republic" means little more than that the Head of State isn't born into the position, as in a monarchy, for example.

And whether or not term-limits of all things are in place....is really not a product of whether a country is a "democracy", a "republic"....or even, gasp......a democratic republic!

[© tweed]

the point I was making is that, when you follow a line of logic down its road far enough, you sometimes hit a paradox. 

Not a very original point.

 CLARK
           Yeah, but I will have a degree. and you'll be serving my
           kids fries at a drive-thru on our way to a skiing trip.

                        WILL
           Yeah, maybe. eh, but at least I won't be unoriginal.

[I Am Feeblepizza.]

America is a republic and not a democracy. There are limits on power. The majority doesn't always rule.

This idiotic distinction between "republic" and "democracy" is an exclusively American thing. It also unfortunately shows that you don't know the meaning of the words.

Democracy is when the supreme power of government rests in the hands of the voters alone.

A republic is where the supreme power of government rests in the hands of certain citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen either directly or indirectly by those citizens.

I do know the meaning of the words. There's a pretty fundamental between the two terms. And I assume that the question pertains to the U.S. because this site is centered mostly around American politics and elections.

Just because a good deal of people in the U.S. use the words this way, doesn't mean it's correct or makes any sense.

"Democracy" and "Republican" do not contradict each other. "Democracy" means rule by the people, whether direct or indirect. "Republic" means little more than that the Head of State isn't born into the position, as in a monarchy, for example.

And whether or not term-limits of all things are in place....is really not a product of whether a country is a "democracy", a "republic"....or even, gasp......a democratic republic!

Check your dictionary, man. You have the wrong definitions.

[Gustaf]

America is a republic and not a democracy. There are limits on power. The majority doesn't always rule.

This idiotic distinction between "republic" and "democracy" is an exclusively American thing. It also unfortunately shows that you don't know the meaning of the words.

Democracy is when the supreme power of government rests in the hands of the voters alone.

A republic is where the supreme power of government rests in the hands of certain citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen either directly or indirectly by those citizens.

I do know the meaning of the words. There's a pretty fundamental between the two terms. And I assume that the question pertains to the U.S. because this site is centered mostly around American politics and elections.

Just because a good deal of people in the U.S. use the words this way, doesn't mean it's correct or makes any sense.

"Democracy" and "Republican" do not contradict each other. "Democracy" means rule by the people, whether direct or indirect. "Republic" means little more than that the Head of State isn't born into the position, as in a monarchy, for example.

And whether or not term-limits of all things are in place....is really not a product of whether a country is a "democracy", a "republic"....or even, gasp......a democratic republic!

Check your dictionary, man. You have the wrong definitions.

Cambridge online dictionary, republic: a country without a king or queen, usually governed by elected representatives of the people and a president

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/republic?q=republic

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Absolutely not.  Term limits are inherently undemocratic.

[I Am Feeblepizza.]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Republic

Dictionary.com: "A state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them."

"A state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state" is the third definition. Nice try, though.

[Franzl]

lol

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Not for Presidents, but definatly for Congress.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[The Mikado]

Yeah, ALF is really abusing the word "Republic," which simply means "a country that isn't a monarchy" (thus North Korea, the US, and, Switzerland are all Republics, but the UK, Saudi Arabia, and Sweden all aren't).  Republic has nothing to do with how the government is actually selected, which, in the US, is done democratically.  The "Republic, not a Democracy" thing is the dumbest talking point.

[Sbane]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Republic

Dictionary.com: "A state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them."

"A state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state" is the third definition. Nice try, though.

Can you give me an example of a "democracy"? Are there any countries in the world where elected representative don't govern as representatives of the people? The referendum system would be the closest to "democracy" as you define it, no?

[Хahar 🤔]

Please don't use dictionary definitions for political terms, although it's always hilarious to see someone cite a dictionary in support of their definition of fascism.

A republic is, as stated above, any state that is not a monarchy. It's a very straightforward concept; the only murky situations are elective monarchies and hereditary republics. The United States is certainly neither.

[Gustaf]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Republic

Dictionary.com: "A state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them."

"A state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state" is the third definition. Nice try, though.

Apart from the fact that "dictionary.com" is a) less trustworthy than Cambridge and b) obviously does not know what it's talking about in its definitions of words that I looked at, it
also lists democracy as a synonym to republic (in your link):

Main Entry:   republic
Part of Speech:   noun
Definition:   nation
Synonyms:   commonwealth, democracy, state


http://thesaurus.com/browse/republic?__utma=1.156932944.1281518314.1281518314.1281518314.1&__utmb=1.3.9.1315556283180&__utmc=1&__utmx=-&__utmz=1.1315556277.2.8.utmcsr=google|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=dictionary&__utmv=-&__utmk=89234203#visualthesaurus

Nice try though.

[I Am Feeblepizza.]

Yeah, ALF is really abusing the word "Republic," which simply means "a country that isn't a monarchy" (thus North Korea, the US, and, Switzerland are all Republics, but the UK, Saudi Arabia, and Sweden all aren't).  Republic has nothing to do with how the government is actually selected, which, in the US, is done democratically.  The "Republic, not a Democracy" thing is the dumbest talking point.

North Korea is not a republic. It has a hereditary head of state.

Can you give me an example of a "democracy"? Are there any countries in the world where elected representative don't govern as representatives of the people? The referendum system would be the closest to "democracy" as you define it, no?

No, I don't think there are any countries where elected officials don't govern as representatives of the people. The referendum system would be the closest thing to a true democracy, yes.

[2952-0-0]

Should have them. It does restrict the right of voters to choose, but there are plenty of greater restrictions which exist in a democratic society for the greater good. This one ensures a steady flow of fresh blood and fresh ideas which are needed in a fast changing world.

[Mechaman]

The fact that this issue is even relevant now days says a lot about the failure of independent minds amongst the majority.

In other words, it clearly shows how much American Society has failed.

[tmthforu94]

Bad officials are still going to be in there regardless, so it's foolish to think term limits would help solve it.

I support making the choice of deciding whether or not someone should be reelected. I do wish Senators had been like the Presidency where people followed Washington's precedent (I think that's the correct word, always get those confused). Not too big on those who are in there almost their entire adult life.

[courts]

No. Things like gerrymandering, ballot access and convoluted financing systems are the drivers behind crazy re-election rates anyway.

[Franzl]

No. Things like gerrymandering, ballot access and convoluted financing systems are the drivers behind crazy re-election rates anyway.

That and low information voters (of which there are a lot in the U.S.). "Oh, look, Mr. XY is running again. Haven't heard anything bad about him and I don't know what his opponent stands for...."

[courts]

No. Things like gerrymandering, ballot access and convoluted financing systems are the drivers behind crazy re-election rates anyway.

That and low information voters (of which there are a lot in the U.S.). "Oh, look, Mr. XY is running again. Haven't heard anything bad about him and I don't know what his opponent stands for...."

Yeah, I think we all have to face facts that americans are just too dumb right now across party lines. Cancerously dumb.

[Хahar 🤔]

No. Things like gerrymandering, ballot access and convoluted financing systems are the drivers behind crazy re-election rates anyway.

That and low information voters (of which there are a lot in the U.S.). "Oh, look, Mr. XY is running again. Haven't heard anything bad about him and I don't know what his opponent stands for...."

Is it any different in other countries? I would imagine that there are far more Americans who know who their congressman is than there are Germans who know who sits in the Bundestag for their constituency.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No though I wouldn't oppose age limits similar to the ones on some federal judges.

[Franzl]

No. Things like gerrymandering, ballot access and convoluted financing systems are the drivers behind crazy re-election rates anyway.

That and low information voters (of which there are a lot in the U.S.). "Oh, look, Mr. XY is running again. Haven't heard anything bad about him and I don't know what his opponent stands for...."

Is it any different in other countries? I would imagine that there are far more Americans who know who their congressman is than there are Germans who know who sits in the Bundestag for their constituency.

Why is it relevant who your Bundestag constituency representative is? Politics don't work that way in Germany. And you know it.

And yes, of course, there are lots of low information voters in every country...but the party based voting as opposed to personal votes in the US certainly prevents an incumbent bonus (at least to the extent seen in the US.....very popular politicians (like Guttenberg in Kulmbach) will still get a personal bonus.).

[Simfan34]

America is a republic and not a democracy. There are limits on power. The majority doesn't always rule.

This idiotic distinction between "republic" and "democracy" is an exclusively American thing. It also unfortunately shows that you don't know the meaning of the words.

Surely the United Kingdom is democratic but not a republic?

I oppose them in democratic countries. As long as elections are free and fair, they are uncessary at times harmful. In less democratic countries, they're a godsend if followed.

[Franzl]

Surely the United Kingdom is democratic but not a republic?

What's your point? The UK is not both....but that doesn't mean the terms contradict each other.