Hypothetical Question Regarding Presedential Elections

Let's say that Presidents DID NOT have term limits and could run as many times as they like- with that said- how do you think elections would have turned out- to keep it simple let's say from Reagans term. Here's my analogy
1. Reagan in 1988 would have won again- albeit narrowly- I think he would have beaten any Republican challenger and would ave also destroyed Mike Dukakais.
2. Reagan would have been told old to run in 1992 and even if he tried would have lost- to Clinton- so Clinton would have won against any GOP.
3. 1996- Clinton landslide against any GOP
4. 2000- Clinton destroys Bush
5. 2004 Clinton would have given one last hooray and destroyed BUSH, MCCain or any other contender
6. 2008 would have had the same results- either Clinton would have passed the torch to Hilary who under those circumstances may have got the nod and beat out Obama but than again people may have got sick of the "Clintons" and Obama gets the nod and again either Obama or Clinton beats any GOP candidate running
7. I would assume if my scenario had happened more than likely no Iraq war- no housing collapse so the Dem in the White house beats out in candidate running in 2012 for the GOP.

Overall if Presidents had no term limits I would see many years of the left owning the WH- just my opinion.

Let's say that Presidents DID NOT have term limits and could run as many times as they like- with that said- how do you think elections would have turned out- to keep it simple let's say from Reagans term. Here's my analogy
1. Reagan in 1988 would have won again- albeit narrowly- I think he would have beaten any Republican challenger and would ave also destroyed Mike Dukakais.
2. Reagan would have been told old to run in 1992 and even if he tried would have lost- to Clinton- so Clinton would have won against any GOP.
3. 1996- Clinton landslide against any GOP
4. 2000- Clinton destroys Bush
5. 2004 Clinton would have given one last hooray and destroyed BUSH, MCCain or any other contender
6. 2008 would have had the same results- either Clinton would have passed the torch to Hilary who under those circumstances may have got the nod and beat out Obama but than again people may have got sick of the "Clintons" and Obama gets the nod and again either Obama or Clinton beats any GOP candidate running
7. I would assume if my scenario had happened more than likely no Iraq war- no housing collapse so the Dem in the White house beats out in candidate running in 2012 for the GOP.

Overall if Presidents had no term limits I would see many years of the left owning the WH- just my opinion. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

You forgot to mention Perot's contribution. Without him, Clinton wouldn't have had a first administration. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act happened on Clinton's watch, so there would have been a housing crisis. BTW, it's ridiculous to assume that changing one variable will not have a significant impact on all subsequent variables. .

I miss slick Willie

Good point about Clinton in 1996. Would he have ran, who would be his opponents, what would he have accomplished as governor of Arkansas? Would he have avoided scandal? The people of Arkansas already know about Jennifer Flowers. Would they have found out about Juanita Brodderick or Paula Jones?

So who would have ran in 1996? John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, Jerry Brown, Paul Tsongas, and Pat Paulson were all in the mix.

I have no doubt that George H W Bush would have been the nominee because the GOP always seems to go with who's next in line.

What about world events? Reagan kicks Husseins ass in 1991? Soviet Union collapses in 1991. Germany reunifies. South Africa gets majority rule. Stock market hits record highs. Reagan is diagnosed with Alzheimers in 1993 but George H W Bush is president.

President Bush is challenged by the Governor of Arkansas, Hillary Clinton who advances her political career on the ruins of her marriage and divorce from the philandering governor. A lot of democratic women have built a career on divorce and tragedy; Huffington, McCarthy of NY, Carnahan of MO, etc. I think the election would have been very close but the novelty of a woman president and GOP fatigue (plus the skills of Hillary) would give the election to Hillary/Kerry in 1996. Does she get reelected in 2000?

I can't see that she would have had a lot to hang her hat on in 2000. The stock market would probably be up but she would have launched Hillarycare II angering many. Steve Forbes wins the GOP nomination and choses John Kasich as his running mate. The election is razor thin with the numerous recounts in the state of Missouri. After 38 days Forbes is declared the winner with a plurality of 634 votes in Buchanan County.

9/11 never occurs because Sudan offers Bin Laden to Hillary Clinton and she takes them up on the offer in 1996. The war on terror never happens though terrorism is still around. With a businessman in charge the fed, Fannie and Freddie get audited. The housing bubble never happens. Forbes voluntarily leaves office in 2004 and Kasich chooses Jeb Bush as his running mate in 2004. Kasich wins handily against John Kerry/Al Gore ticket.

Continued world pressure lead by the USA brings down the regime of Iran in 2006. It is revealed that they have a thriving WMD program and have been recieving aid from Pakistan and North Korea. Running on a national security theme former president Hillary Clinton wins her party's nomination in 2008 and chooses Joe Lieberman as her new running mate. Hillary wins and the rest they say will be history

Hillary didn't get active in electoral politics until after Bill was leaving office. I doubt if we'd have had an Obama if Clinton had run for three terms. We also probably wouldn't have had a GWB. It's all speculation.

Hillary didn't get active in electoral politics until after Bill was leaving office. I doubt if we'd have had an Obama if Clinton had run for three terms. We also probably wouldn't have had a GWB. It's all speculation. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yes of course it's speculation- but makes you wonder

I miss slick Willie Originally Posted by ekim008

Don't we all? [Well, maybe not all...]

Like I said many a woman has advanced a career from the ruins of a marriage. I think Clinton, as governor, would have eventually been brought down and Hillary is the type to take full advantage of the notoriety and publicity. I think Bill would have never gotten any traction but Hillary would have taken his head on her way to the governor's mansion in Arkansas.

If Bill Clinton were allowed to run for the Presidency right now, he would win.

True, take Ross Perot out of the equation, and Clinton would have never been elected the first time. But, after he won, he did solidify himself as the only true 'Rock Star' in American Politics, and in this Country, that trumps just about everything.

Also, in my opinion, if Hillary thought for one minute she could get away with it, she would go against President Obama in 2012 for the Democrat Nomination.

If Bill Clinton were allowed to run for the Presidency right now, he would win.

True, take Ross Perot out of the equation, and Clinton would have never been elected the first time. But, after he won, he did solidify himself as the only true 'Rock Star' in American Politics, and in this Country, that trumps just about everything.

Also, in my opinion, if Hillary thought for one minute she could get away with it, she would go against President Obama in 2012 for the Democrat Nomination. Originally Posted by Jackie S

I agree wholeheartedly with Jackie's analysis, and that Hilary would throw her hat in the ring this time around if she thought she could get by with it.

I also agree Regan would have had three terms.

There would always have been a Perot, because one of the main reasons he ran was his intense hatred for HW. But with three Regan administrations, would Bush have been strong enough to over come Clinton with Perot? Who knows. Would the American people be sick of Reganism and the Republicans and voted Clinton in? I'd go with sick of Republicans and we'd elect Clinton with no presidency for HW.

I think Clinton for three, and maybe even four terms, if the economy held.

Without 41, there would never have the 43, and thankfully the American people would have been spared that mistake.

I think after Clinton's three or four terms, we would have swung back Republican. Don't know who'd that be. The playing field would be changed because with no HW presidency his heir apparents W and Jeb may not have been on the radar.

I do think Obama would eventually be elected, but he'd have to wait out a Republican presidency and maybe by then his "present" voting record and book writing while Senating might have interrupted his grand plans. Who knows.

All I do know is Regan and Clinton would have gone three and maybe four for Clinton, and a high likelihood of no Bush presidency.

I have to disagree with the latest post. If G H W Bush had not been president that would not count out two successful governors of Texas and Florida. If fact think the avoidance of inherited office would have helped either George or Jeb.

I think Hillary could take Obama if she tried but historically even a successful challenge results in the challenger and the challenged losing the election. Taft/Roosevelt/Wilson 1912, Ford/Reagan/Carter 1976, Carter/Kennedy/Reagan 1980. There were convention challenges in 1948 and walk outs but no serious primary challenger other than the years noted.

I have seen the theory that Obama can drop out (like LBJ) and ask for the nomination by acclamation of Hillary Clinton at the convention. This depends on whether or not Obama could get his ego in check and step aside.