• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Three Term US Presidents other than FDR

Japhy said:
Its not as though he took national security particularly serious before hand.

43* is a bit of a hack piece but it does note how the Clinton administration National Security establishment more or less viewed removing Bin Laden as the solution to the problem of Al Qaeda. And that by the USS Cole Bombing killing him (something Clinton had wrung his hands about before) probably doesn't actually stop the attacks. Maybe Bubba takes the shot, if one comes up in a third term. But AQ will keep moving without the big man.
Click to expand...
I feel like that's sort of a doomeristic view, while it's true that Al-Qaeda would keep moving -- the only reason why 9/11 moved along as it did was because of Bin Laden's unifing presence and funding. Without his funding, charisma, or just ... general leadership, the plot falls dead in the water.

Highly recommend The Looming Tower to know more about this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Looming_Tower
 
TheKennedyMachine said:
I feel like that's sort of a doomeristic view, while it's true that Al-Qaeda would keep moving -- the only reason why 9/11 moved along as it did was because of Bin Laden's unifing presence and funding. Without his funding, charisma, or just ... general leadership, the plot falls dead in the water.

Highly recommend The Looming Tower to know more about this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Looming_Tower
Click to expand...

Have read The Looming Tower, thanks. If you want people to tell you Clinton or Gore being in office ensures there's no attack you can just say that. Doesn't mean I have to agree with that assessment.
 
I mean for a no attack TL to happen, you have to figure out a way that you don't just get a different attack later? Which probably requires a collapse of political Islamist opposition to the US earlier, dunno what that involves beyond say Oslo actually ending the occupation* plus assorted other things that might weaken real or perceived US power projection in the middle east.

*defined for these purposes as "two-state solution on '67 border with slight adjustments or otehr mutually acceptable deal
 
Roger II said:
I mean for a no attack TL to happen, you have to figure out a way that you don't just get a different attack later? Which probably requires a collapse of political Islamist opposition to the US earlier, dunno what that involves beyond say Oslo actually ending the occupation* plus assorted other things that might weaken real or perceived US power projection in the middle east.

*defined for these purposes as "two-state solution on '67 border with slight adjustments or otehr mutually acceptable deal
Click to expand...
Oslo actually succeeding is an amazing POD that hasn’t been used a lot.
 
Meadow said:
To get out of parody for a second, one wonders how Barry would've done if we handwave the 22nd. IIRC his numbers were good but not 'holy shit he'd walk it' good (which people talk about Bill 2000 being, I don't know if that's true). But given Hill-Rod lost in part because her campaign assumed she'd get Obama-levels of minority turnout (and she just got Pretty Good, She's A Clinton levels of minority turnout), Obama probably would've been okay.

You have to make him want a third term though - knowing what we know now, 2016 feels like a pivotal election, but it didn't in the run-up until Trump was on the ballot. It's not France Has Just Fallen territory.

Trump vs Actual Obama would've been horrendous to watch, for lots of reasons.
Click to expand...
He gave a very similar answer to Clinton. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/26/barack-obama-third-term-president

I think he probably would have won but I bet he would have done worse than in 2012 so it would be a bit awkward. You could imagine a lot of write-ups like 'Hilary wouldn't have lost Florida'.

Imagine if Clinton gets VP in return for not running lol, and like Biden goes to State Dept. Big Decline hours.
 
Makemakean said:
I'm a bit curious regarding exactly when we reach the point where Presidents really started to take health warnings seriously as in "you shouldn't be running for re-election" seriously.

Certainly Wilson didn't think that a stroke would be a problem when lobbying behind the scenes for a third term in 1920. FDR's physicians described his condition in 1944 as "appalling" and said he was close to everything between a stroke and a heart attack, but that didn't stop him from running for a fourth term the same year. Despite a heart attack in 1955, Ike still ran for a second term in 1956, Kennedy could barely remain standing for longer periods of time without a veritable cocktail of drugs, and LBJ had had a heart attack himself in 1955.

Of course, in France, Mitterrand became aware that he was suffering from cancer the very year he assumed the Presidency in 1981, and yet he still felt that should run for a second term in 1988.

No doubt there is a large degree of phasing in and phasing out going on here, but I'm sort of curious where the tipping point is.
Click to expand...
The first one where it seems to have been public knowledge and where the White House had to step in for PR was Eisenhower, to my understanding. So I would argue that was probably the tipping point, but there was and is always the option of concealment especially for a candidate who looks young and healthy, like Kennedy.
 
ASB, but here it goes. Whoever writes the 22nd kind of goofs it and the language ultimately reads that a president may not serve more than two consecutive terms.

I can't imagine many presidents post-Roosevelt being able to pull it off (unless there's no Watergate scandal, and Nixon beats the post-1976 Democratic President in 1980) up till Clinton. I could easily see him beating Bush in '04 on an "I told you so" platform, which would reinforce the claims that Al Gore lost due to his comparative lack of charisma. Of course, Hilldawg's been waiting for Her Turn, so an additional run from Bill might be the thing that finally makes her file for divorce.

If not that, then Obama in 2020 if Michelle lets him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top