Clinton would still most definitely be in office. That monkey tool Bush would never have beaten Clinton in 2000 if the USA didn't have a stupid two term rule. I frankly don't understand that rule actually. Yes, I know Americans are typically afraid of one man having too much power, but the Senate and House are adequate checks of power on the President, no matter how long he's in office.
Look at Britain and Canada...Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister for 12 years from 79 to 91. Mackenzie King was PM of Canada for 22 years from 1935 until 1957 and Pierre Trudeau from 1968 until 1984. Did they take over their governments and turn them into dictatorships because they lasted more than two terms?
The USA would be so much better off if Clinton was still President.
___________________
"No offense, but you're stupid"
Nov-02-2004 23:49
icyhandofcrap
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Cali
quote:
Originally posted by jp
If it weren't for the 2 term rule, Clinton would be still in office
I'd rather keep the 2 term rule, even though I liked Clinton.
Originally posted by JM
truthfully, i'm not. there will be so much pressure on either one to do a lot of things and deliver as promised. i dont think kerry will be able to deliver all as promised, but we will see. either way, change will be slow and gradual with either as president. only thing i really really dont like is the fact kerry is such a socialist, a far-left liberal.
