The Instigator
fredman15
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
vardas0antras
Con (against)
Winning
58 Points

should a president be allowed to serve more than two terms

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 10 votes the winner is...
vardas0antras
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/17/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,362 times Debate No: 14069
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (10)

 

fredman15

Pro

I'm for them letting Presidents serving more than two terms because if our nation is doing great under that president why not let him serve more besides it is us the people that is voting him in and if we like it then we should keep him in office especially if he is doing good for out country
vardas0antras

Con

Its good to debate you again ! Before I dive into my own arguments I must remind everybody that Pro has the burden of proof.

POP(the problem of power)
The highest office should not serve for life. Letting someone serve for life can lead to a king or a dictatorship. I understand representatives and senators serving for life. That's ok, since they're not leading the country. The whole reason that George Washington refused to run for a third term was because he didn't want to serve for life, which is what a king does, and monarchies are against the Constitution.
http://home.comcast.net...

PNV(the problem of new voices)
By ensuring that no President can serve more than two terms, democracy ensures that competing voices continue to emerge in politics. These competing voices may be disagreed by the consensus but for the sake of democracy they're very important.

PofP(problem of proof)
The 22nd amendment:
According to it the president must serve only two terms. USA must follow the constitution unless there are very convincing reasons to change it. My opponent must prove that without a doubt its better to have the 22nd amendment changed.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

POE(the problem of efficiency)
People do better when under time limit. Assurance of a longer time in office might lead to a lessening of the feeling of urgency to change things that are wrong with the country. It might even be replaced with a feeling of having all the time in the world to work things out. I think that one of the things that makes our government able to adapt quickly to changes in the world political climate is the limitation of presidential terms.

My opponents arguments:
"if our nation is doing great under that president " Its better to be safe than sorry. We must not take any risks and we must let other voice emerge. Furthermore if the president has all the time in the world he may become lazy and unproductive.

"it is us the people that is voting him in"
You do realize that Stalin and Hitler were very popular among their people? Also, ironically preventing someone to serve more than two terms encourages freedom.

Wherefore your points are erroneous and even if I was to ignore them, you would still not meet the huge burden of proving something without a doubt.

Thank you,
V0Antras
Debate Round No. 1
fredman15

Pro

It is good to debate you again to. My opponent has a very strong comeback but i must say you are correct that can lead to king but you have to remeber the govt does not let all the power go to the president he has a little bit more power than he other officilas but you still have the three branches and if we do not like him you have to agree with me on this we could assaintate him or her lol. but e put them in and if we see that they are becoming lazy or anything the house or sentate will take care of him then they will get him out of office. FDR served more than two terms and he would have served more but he died and he was a great president and we kept putting him in. Theodore R. was great when his two terms was up america wanted him to serve again but he could not he said if you want a president like me elect William Howard Taft in and there went a big an of worms open up right there and Theodore R. could have kept doing great things but he could not keep doing great things because his terms was up
vardas0antras

Con

My opponents first argument is that:
"the govt does not let all the power go to the president"
Which is unimportant since you also agree that:
"you are correct that can lead to king"

The president has more than enough power to become a dictator or make it easier for someone else to become a dictator:
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Now if we consider the corruption which is everywhere, we realize that its a dangerous change you're proposing.

His second argument:
" we could assaintate him or her lol"
There were 42 assassination attempts on Hitler:
http://wiki.answers.com...
Yet he died by his own hand. One would think that there would be no dictators if you can simply kill them, but there are. Also its not the dictator but the government which is created by the dictator that is our problem.

"becoming lazy or anything the house or sentate will take care of him"
You assume that:
1. There's no corruption.
2. The president would make it obvious.
3. The president hasn't obtained enough power to prevent this.

Then he mentions great presidents... This by no means has any effect on my arguments but I do find it funny that:
"FDR served more than two terms and he would have served more but he died and he was a great president and we kept putting him in"

FDR is the reasons why there are no more than two terms before him presidents served two terms because of the tradition George Washington set up. "Many people began to think that there was a sense of ownership about his administration. That is many thought that Roosevelt felt like he owned the presidency and that he was loosing touch with the people of the country. (This was an attitude that was most prominent among Republicans.)

So, in 1951 the twenty-second amendment to the Constitution was ratified. This amendment limits a person to only being able to be elected to the office of President twice (only once if the president becomes president by replacing the previous president because he left office less than halfway through his term). So, what was once tradition has now been constitutionally mandated."

http://www.answerbag.com...

I also like to point out that as I have that my opponent has an unusually big burden of proof as I have stated in the previous round:

"PofP(problem of proof)
The 22nd amendment:
According to it the president must serve only two terms. USA must follow the constitution unless there are very convincing reasons to change it. My opponent must prove that without a doubt its better to have the 22nd amendment changed."
Debate Round No. 2
fredman15

Pro

I agree with the person that committed our debate we keep changing presidents and once you think about it it is not fair to presidents to come in and have to clean all the other presidents mess up and if they re lucky they might have time to do what they wanted to do and then you keep changing and changing and it is unfair to the president therefore if we can have a president that can serve more than two terms he can clean all the past president mess up then have more time to do what he wanted to do and our nation would be a much better place if we had presidents like Ronald Regan to stay in office he was an excellent president and he had to get out because his two terms was up we need a to make it where they can serve more than two terms
vardas0antras

Con

My opponent has ignored all of my arguments, wow.

My opponent claims that presidents don't have enough time to finish their job. Links please or that's untrue.
Also you misspelled " Ronald Regan" its Ronald Reagan. Anyhow unless he deals with my arguments and proves his own, there's no reason to vote pro.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
fredman15

Pro

dude whatever
vardas0antras

Con

Vote Con.

Thank you
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by fredman15 6 years ago
fredman15
shut up dinokiller you are just jelous cause you are not a freddie blakley
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
Hah you should stay longer your own pitiful world. As now, we all hate and pity you.
Posted by fredman15 6 years ago
fredman15
who cares what yall think iam the fredman and everybody loves thefredman
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
@ fredman15
No one likes ad hominems
Posted by fredman15 6 years ago
fredman15
yea right you are such an idiot
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
Its no christmas gift. He voted for you to prevent us from suspecting him as a vote bomber.
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
Thanks
Posted by fredman15 6 years ago
fredman15
lol i voted for you to be nice its a christmas gift merry christmas
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
why
Posted by fredman15 6 years ago
fredman15
vote me
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by fredman15 6 years ago
fredman15
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by uglypeopleareawesome 6 years ago
uglypeopleareawesome
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by MikeNovotny 6 years ago
MikeNovotny
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by losedotexe 6 years ago
losedotexe
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Palin2012 6 years ago
Palin2012
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by sammyc96 6 years ago
sammyc96
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
fredman15vardas0antrasTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06