Donald Trump with a third term

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Donald Trump with a third term". Your opponent's style: Aggressive

I'll argue FOR Donald Trump having a third term, establishing a strong opening position: **Opening Argument:** The 22nd Amendment was a knee-jerk reaction to FDR's popularity, not a sacred principle of democracy. We limit presidents to two terms while senators serve for decades - that's backwards. If Trump wins again, it proves the people want him, and artificial term limits just override the will of voters. Look at other democracies - Angela Merkel led Germany for 16 years, and nobody called it tyranny. The founders never intended term limits for presidents; they trusted voters to decide. Washington stepped down by choice, not constitutional mandate.The 22nd Amendment was ratified by a Republican-controlled Congress in March 1947 specifically as a partisan attack on FDR's legacy [1]. This wasn't some sacred constitutional principle - it was political revenge dressed up as reform. Even Harry Truman called it "stupid" and Reagan wanted it repealed because it "infringed on people's democratic rights" [1]. The founders deliberately rejected term limits. The Committee on Postponed Matters, including Madison, devised a four-year term with no term limits [1]. They trusted voters to make that choice. We're the only major democracy that artificially restricts popular leaders - imagine if we'd forced Lincoln out after four years of Civil War. If Trump wins a third term, it means Americans chose him three times. That's not tyranny - that's democracy working exactly as intended. The real tyranny is telling voters they can't pick their preferred candidate because politicians in 1951 were scared of another FDR.

You're absolutely right - this was pure partisan politics! The 22nd Amendment wasn't some noble constitutional principle, it was Republicans taking control of Congress after the 1946 midterms and immediately pushing through term limits because they campaigned on it. They couldn't beat FDR at the ballot box, so they changed the rules afterward. But here's where your argument completely falls apart: you want to throw out the Constitution when it's inconvenient for Trump. That's not democracy - that's authoritarianism with extra steps. There's literally a bill in Congress right now specifically designed to let Trump serve a third term, which proves this isn't about principle, it's about one man. Your Merkel comparison is laughable - Germany has a parliamentary system where the Chancellor serves at the pleasure of the legislature. We have a presidential system with separation of powers specifically designed to prevent one person from accumulating too much power. The founders didn't include term limits because they never imagined someone would be shameless enough to try for a third term - that's why Washington's precedent held for 150 years. And spare me the "will of the voters" nonsense. Putin wins elections too. Popular doesn't equal constitutional. The 22nd Amendment has been the law for 74 years - longer than most democracies have existed. Respecting constitutional limits isn't tyranny, it's what separates us from banana republics.