Should U.S. Presidential term limits be abolished?

[TNF]

Term limits are undemocratic and should be repealed.

[RogueBeaver]

Term limits are undemocratic and should be repealed.

This. Voters can decide when to retire a president.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

They should be reduced to zero terms.

[RosettaStoned]

 They should be changed to one term. Four years is long enough.

[RogueBeaver]

Absolutely. Let voters decide when an incumbent has worn out their welcome.

[Senator Snowstalker]

Absolutely. Let voters decide when an incumbent has worn out their welcome.

[Reginald]

Absolutely. Let voters decide when an incumbent has worn out their welcome.

Yeah, this. It'll probably only be a very successful President who exceeds two terms anyway* (unless the other party repeatedly nukes its chances... then I guess a more mediocre incumbent could keep slipping by).

* I've chosen to trust the collective judgment of the average American this time.

[useful idiot]

No.

Democrats, do you really want to be stuck with Obama if he decides to run for a third term under a scenario without limits? Ousting an incumbent through the primaries is a nearly impossible task, which is primarily why I'd be against it.

[Dr. Cynic]

Absolutely. Let voters decide when an incumbent has worn out their welcome.

[I Can't Get That Sound You Make, Out Of My Head]

Yes.

Chances are that if president's stay around long enough, they'll get unpopular and lose their jobs.

[MilesC56]

I staunchly oppose term-limits in general, but not so much for the Presidency. Maybe the limit should be two consecutive terms and after 4 years, allow them to run again. 

[freefair]

I support  the total abolition of them on democratic grounds at least or the raising of them to 3.
If it has be tightened, 6 year single terms like the senate.

[Michaelf7777777]

Yes they should as voters should have the option to remove them (and it is even easier in the US as they can be beaten in either the primaries or the General Election than it is in many parliamentary countries with no term limits such as the UK, Australia and New Zealand). It is also unlikely that any 'Presidents for Life' would happen in this situation because voter fatigue at the incumbents will enable them to be beaten (Since WWII the longest one PM has lasted in power continously in the UK is 11 years and in New Zealand 12 years)

[Simfan34]

Democracy allows the common man to make his own bed, and indeed he must lie in it. Democracy allows him to govern himself and make decisions, no matter how stupid. I am not a fan of this "maximalist" democracy, but if you want to make a valid claim to it, term limits run counter to its spirit.

However I am strongly in favor of term limits in countries with weak democratic institutions. As they mature, term limits can be abolished.

[perdedor]

You could theoretically, but it wouldn't make much difference. The voting populace of today is too skeptical, impatient, and pessimistic to reelect a President twice.

[Redalgo]

No - the President should have a single-term limit with the duration of said term lengthened a bit. I favor stringent term limitations as a means of encouraging officials to focus on their jobs instead of restless campaigning and pandering to strategic constituencies after assuming office. It is the core responsibility of elected officials to act as trustees serving in the common interest. For at least the time being, American politics is too clientelistic for us to abolish term limits without it exacerbating corruption willingly participated in by the masses, representatives, interest groups and party elites.

[BaldEagle1991]

Coming from a state where we have had a douchebag governor who wants to keep on running until the day he dies...No, we need term limits to keep d-bags out. I would hate that on the federal level.

[Simfan34]

You could theoretically, but it wouldn't make much difference. The voting populace of today is too skeptical, impatient, and pessimistic to reelect a President twice.

Very, very true.