6 year term for US Presidents starting in the 2000 election

CT23

This may be a bit ASB, but let's say starting with the 2000 election the U.S. would elect Presidents for one six-year term. (Inspired by some commentary I heard on a news/opinion show that the U.S. should do one six-year terms for the President)

How would that timeline go in terms of who occupies the White House?

My guess for starters (election winners):

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)

I'm not sure how it would proceed after that. If it hadn't been for the recent scandals, I probably would have picked Christie for 2018.

I guess this is kind of like one of those threads where the next poster adds a date/candidate for the list?
 
Last edited:

NickCT

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2016: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
 

CT23

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2024: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
2030: Justin Amash (R-MI)
 
Last edited:

rpryor03

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2024: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
2030: Justin Amash (R-MI)
2036: Joe Kennedy III (D-MA)
 

Hnau

Banned
This was originally suggested by Dr. Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia, in his book A More Perfect Constitution where he presents ideas for amendments to the US Constitution. He believed the presidency could be perfected with a single six-year term, with a "national referendum" on the presidency being held during the sixth year, majority approval in which would grant the president a two-year extension.

The idea was to give the president more time to work out policy before having to worry about the election year again, and if they feel they can follow through with their campaign promises and set up their legacy within 6 years, then they wouldn't even have to worry about winning the extension.
 

Mike Stearns

Hnau said:
The idea was to give the president more time to work out policy before having to worry about the election year again, and if they feel they can follow through with their campaign promises and set up their legacy within 6 years, then they wouldn't even have to worry about winning the extension.
Click to expand...

I like that idea. It's functionally equivalent to a vote of no confidence. If you win, you get the equivalent of two four year terms. If you lose, you're done.
 

NickCT

There's also the fact that if there's no question he's going to be done in six years he doesn't need to spend the first four worrying about doing what's politically convenient and the last four worrying about his legacy. If everyone is a lame duck once they start its a built-in mechanism to get things done.
 
Jonathan

Jonathan

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2024: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
2030: Justin Amash (R-MI)
2036: Joe Kennedy III (D-MA)
2042: Brian Sandoval (R-NA) He died in office
2043: Mary Cheney (R-WN) First Openly Gay President
 

Know Nothing

The thread consensus that Dems win in 2006 or 2012 is interesting. It suggests one of the two following things:

1. A Democratic presidential win in 2006 will result in the 2008 crash being averted. Or:

2. The 2008 crash still happens with a Dem in the White House, but either the recovery is effective enough or Republicans are inept enough that Dems retain the presidency in 2012.

If ATL plays out near identically to OTL with the 2008 crash except with Clinton in the White House following a 2006 win, I think Republicans would win in 2012.
 
Jonathan

Jonathan

Know Nothing said:
The thread consensus that Dems win in 2006 or 2012 is interesting. It suggests one of the two following things:

1. A Democratic presidential win in 2006 will result in the 2008 crash being averted. Or:

2. The 2008 crash still happens with a Dem in the White House, but either the recovery is effective enough or Republicans are inept enough that Dems retain the presidency in 2012.

If ATL plays out near identically to OTL with the 2008 crash except with Clinton in the White House following a 2006 win, I think Republicans would win in 2012.
Click to expand...

Why can't they still have a crash in 2008, but not as savier as OTL crash, with Clinton blaming the Bush Administration and it is fixed before 2012?
 

CT23

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2024: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
2030: Justin Amash (R-MI)
2036: Joe Kennedy III (D-MA)
2042: Brian Sandoval (R-NA) He died in office
2043: Mary Cheney (R-WN) First Openly Gay President
2048: Julian Castro (D-TX)
 

AdmiralBlake

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2024: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
2030: Justin Amash (R-MI)
2036: Joe Kennedy III (D-MA)
2042: Brian Sandoval (R-NA) He died in office
2043: Mary Cheney (R-WN) First Openly Gay President
2048: Julian Castro (D-TX)
2054: Peter Griffin (D-RI)
 

TPL99

2000: George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006: Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
2012: Barack Obama (D-IL)
2018: Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2024: Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
2030: Justin Amash (R-MI)
2036: Joe Kennedy III (D-MA)
2042: Brian Sandoval (R-NA) He died in office
2043: Mary Cheney (R-WN) First Openly Gay President
2048: Julian Castro (D-TX)
2054: Peter Griffin (D-RI)
2060: Samuel Cork (R-KY) First Atheist President
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top