There is a reason that this is already a law. It elminates the possibility of dictatorship or total control over a country. If we had a president for let's say 16 years, then the chance of them taking advantage of their power is great. Another reason it is a good law to only serve two terms is not everyone wanted that one president to be president in the first place. Some people are republicans, others democrats and by having new presidents with new view points every couple of years expunges the possibility of rebellions and violence from different views and parties. The different views and ways a president does things is good to have refreshed every couple of years.

The law that states a president can only server for two terms is a relatively newer one which was set up so that one party could not control the government for extended periods of time. When our government was first formed under the constitution George Washington was the one who set the precedent of only serving two terms when in reality he could've served many more due to his skill, intelligence, and love that the people had for him. Franklin D. Roosevelt himself was voted into office a remarkable 4 times. This meant that he and his political party controlled most of the power in the government for 16 years. That's my entire lifespan right there under the same person. Now he was elected 4 times for sevral reason besides being an incredible leader by getting the United States out of the Great Depression and leading us to victory in WWII but that is still an incredibly long time. The two term law was put into place so that a person could not hold power for that long, because as history has shown us before when a person gets too used to power it becomes incredibly difficult to take it away from them. The two conflicting political parties also fueled its creation by allowing the losing party to not have to compete with an opposing candidate who has already defeated them two times before. This also casues a constant new stream of presidential candidates which ensure that new ideas and the voice of the people is theo ne who is leading us, not someone from who won through those means 12 years ago and is now running again without changing his philosphy with the times at all. The need for change and guidance from new sources is a pivotal part of the US govrnment system.

I think presidents shouldn't be allowed more than two terms. If we elect a person that we think is good but, then find out he ain't, then we can't do nuthan about it until the next election. Like George Bush, he got the better of the votes because he had good ideas for America,but when he got into office, he did more worse than good. We couldn't do anythang about it because it wasn't time to reelect aagin.I think it would be better to have just two terms rather than more than two.

If presidents were allowed more than two terms, I think the United States would eventually become a dictatorship. Some presidents strengthen America more than others, but some weren't so good. For example, Lyndon B. Johnson. This man was President from 1968-1974 and had possible CIA involvement in the overthrow of Prince Sihanouk, which caused much controversy. If Johnson was president for eighteen years, the people wouldn't be happy. If America had a president that you didn't like, the two terms gives you a chance to change that with votes. If presidents become able to have more than two terms, the people would end up overthrowing the government. Two terms gives America a second chance after the first term, anyway.

A president shouldnt be able to serve more than two terms because they will loose touch with the country. Thats why George Washington came up with the rule. Because living in the white house for eight years, awya from your home town, or other such commnities. After eight years a president wont know the peoples needs as much as he would if he just came into office. Not knowing what the people need is a bad way to govern a country. Because you dont know how to relate to the people any more. And yes on one occasion a preident has served more than two terms, and that was Franklin Roosevelt, and that was because the country was in the middle of a major war. It would have been dangerous to elect another president. Thats why a president should only be allowed to serve two terms.

If there is one person in power to long he can end up making wrong decisions and then where will that leave us. Yes he can be vetoed or what ever but he still has lots of sway over the people sometimes just cause he is a different race or has different beliefs, or someone could just like his new little dog. You never know what people are thinking it's America after all we are all crazy people. Sometimes the president gets to make decisions with out having to consult anyone on them like the war in Iraq, Bush never pulled out and he had ample opportunity and Barack wants to and is slowly bringing some people home but then still sending them away. If you want to send someone there they should voluntieer cause ya they joined the military they are voluntieering but no some people were promised they would only be reserve and now they are over there. Fort Hood the man that did the shooting was distraught cause he found out he was going to have to go to Iraq if we just pulled out of there like some president said it wouldnt have happened. The presidents change their mind about everything they do now. They say one thing then do another. Why should our country be confused about everything for three in a half or seven years. Think about it, the presidents always promise all these things then cant deliver. Or they will be active for 6 months or so and then nothing and the country is confused or just doesn't care till a big action happens that effects everyone the wrong way. If there are more presidents there will be more chances of action. There will be more things changing positively.

Every new president we've had has had different and new ideas. Some of them are bad, others are good. If presidents could be president for more than two terms our country wouldn't be where it is today. We would have all sorts of different rules. Who knows who would be president right now, if this were so. Another thing is death. What if our president was president for so long, he died? We would run into all sorts of mourning and drama. The vice president would have to be bumbed up to president. I'm sure a lot of people would have issues with that. It's a wise choice to limit presidents to two terms.

If the president is qualified for the job and during his two terms he showed the Americans that he/she can do what it takes for a president to accomplish in two terms then i believe he/she should be allowed but Most likely by the time his/her second term ends the public is not in the favor of that leader that we have been following for more then 8 years. What counts the most in the end are the opinions of the people that will vote their next leader in, so if we could elect the same leader for another full term then the problems we have been facing will be faced for more years. I also firmly stand on the point that every person should have two chances in their life so we should definitely provide our current presidents the chance to go through their second term and try to fix what they could not do their first term but if they could not fix the issues that have been their for their two terms then it shows that they cannot resolve the issues we hope for our presidents to resolve.

Presidents should have no more than two terms to serve in office, and sometimes two terms might be too long. If president Bush were still in office, the economy would be in even more turmoil than it already is. On the other hand, if the president does an excellent job in leading the country with little mistakes, then the law of a president being allowed to serve more than two terms would be beneficial. A president's amount of time in office should be dependent on how fair and reliable the president is.

I feel that we should be able to learn from others in order to improve ourselves and progress. For example, if the best president we've ever had serves two successful terms, the preceding leaders should take notes and try to imitate the behavior of the greatest president. Chances are, they probably won't even be able to compare to what the other president did for the country, but it shows the effort. Also, history will repeat itself, but keeping a president in office for more than two terms will only increase the chances of a pattern. I feel that a variety of leaders is necessary. Sometimes a president is voted in based off of popularity more than their requirements as the leader of our country, and, although it may be risky or disappointing at times, it's their chance to potentially make or break our country. Allowing a leader to serving only two terms seems just and fit to me.

Allowing presidents to serve up to two terms was created for a reason. A president may have a good thing going but more often than not, every good leader has their downfall. Sometime citizens are conflicted over which candidate to vote for and too many mistaken views on a candidates ideals can cause the wrong president to be chosen. It is our duty as citizens to make sure the country is run in the best manner possible by the person who is most qualified. It is extremely foolish to allow a terrible president to run again and again. However, an unfit president can be impeached but the best way to prevent a disastrous term is to not allow it at all. Allowing presidents to constantly run can cause an unsafe lack of balance in political opinions. This could lead people to riot and cause more political and social unrest.

No, because according to the 20th amendment the president can only have two terms. Since that has been applied for so long, there is no reason to change it. They should only have the two terms because, after a while the people may want somebody new. They may desire somebody that can make the U.S even better than what it previous was. The president should just serve his or her terms and then another person replaces them.

If a president had the possibility to stay in office longer he (or she) might decide to make more popular decisions instead of the right ones to ensure four more years of being president, and with each new president you get a different viewpoint on things that the previous president didn't have. say one great president's only experience with homeless people is that they are taken care of and so he doesn't do anything about homeless people, but then the next is very sensitive to homeless peoples lifestyles but likes wars. Each president will have some things they can do good and some things they cant and by having more presidents you get more diverse views on how things in america stand.

The first president of the United States, George Washington, began the unspoken president of two terms as president which later evolved into a set law. Washington could have been unanimously elected to a third consecutive term, but stated to the public that "no president should serve more than two terms." One reason Washington believed this is because if somebody did, they life of presidency would cut them off from life as a normal citizen. Try to imagine being the most powerful figure in one of the most powerful countries in the world for more than eight years, then imagine going back to living a normal life as an everyday citizen. You would lose connection with the people, and this is already seen today in Congress. Millions of Americans disagree with the new public option health care bill that many polititians and even Obama are trying to pass; it hasn't even been two years since recent elections and they've already lost connection to their citizens. If anybody were allowed to serve over 8 years, the central government would shatter due to being severed from the people of this great country.

I strongly disagree that a president should be able to serve more than two terms. We need variety of presidents so that the country will have different views on what needs to be fixed for our country. Also, the president that serves more than two terms may not be as good as he/she used to be and needs a fresher outlook with newer ideas. Another reason is that when a president is being voted on, if it is 51/49, who is to say the other prescient isn't just as good or better. This is why we need to cycle through people that are going to be our presidents.

Harry S. Truman served two terms as president and when the third came around he resigned. Being in office is a difficult and time comsuming process that sometimes can strip someone away from the life they once had. Teddy Roosevelt is the perfect example. He served two terms then left office to go on a safari in Africa leaving Taft as president. Though old presidents were/are no longer in office they still can make a difference it's just that people should understand presidents have lives to and don't always want to spend there time worrying about a country.