True, but what if the president really sucks in the first term? 8 years makes more sense than 7. Either way, would be interesting to just say a single 8 year term and leave out the re-election nonsense. Although, it certainly gives the president even more power when they know they never have to worry about re-election. We already have this to an extent with the two term rule. Many presidents get more bold with their agenda in their second term since they don't have to worry about re-election.
I think the framers in theory intended for recurring 4 year terms. Being very new to democracy they didn't realize how much time people would take campaigning--back in the day it was considered rude to campaign for yourself. Also, they assumed people would readily retire from congress after a few years / people also didn't live as long.
True, but what if the president really sucks in the first term? 8 years makes more sense than 7. Either way, would be interesting to just say a single 8 year term and leave out the re-election nonsense. Although, it certainly gives the president even more power when they know they never have to worry about re-election. We already have this to an extent with the two term rule. Many presidents get more bold with their agenda in their second term since they don't have to worry about re-election.
Yeah that's the risk, maybe one 6 year term so they don’t stay as long? No easy answer really, both ways have pros and cons
I think the framers in theory intended for recurring 4 year terms. Being very new to democracy they didn't realize how much time people would take campaigning--back in the day it was considered rude to campaign for yourself. Also, they assumed people would readily retire from congress after a few years / people also didn't live as long.