# 180 Mile March for Term Limits in Chicago



## ddbirdy (Oct 12, 2018)

Jim Coxworth is a regular citizen who is fed up with the abuse of non term-limited politicians in the corrupt state of Illinois and is currently LIVE broadcasting his 180 mile walk for Term Limit awareness on his facebook page....more info on episode #9 of the "No Uncertain Terms" podcast produced by U.S. Term Limits...

Search "No Uncertain Terms on iTunes or Stitcher or go to the Term Limits website to listen

Episode #9


----------



## MarathonMike (Oct 12, 2018)

Good for him. Too bad there aren't thousands marching with him.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 13, 2018)

It is a great idea.   The problem is, the people who have to pass the law are the ones who benefit from there being no term limits.


----------



## joaquinmiller (Oct 15, 2018)

A term-limited politician takes with both hands, because the end is nigh.  It turns office-holding into shorter-term training for lobbying. 

Terms are already limited by the ballot box.  Why should a district, precinct, or State lose a capable person - approved by his/her current constituency - due to an arbitrary limitation?


----------



## doesanyoneknowmyname (Oct 15, 2018)

ddbirdy said:


> Jim Coxworth is a regular citizen who is fed up with the abuse of non term-limited politicians in the corrupt state of Illinois and is currently LIVE broadcasting his 180 mile walk for Term Limit awareness on his facebook page....more info on episode #9 of the "No Uncertain Terms" podcast produced by U.S. Term Limits...
> 
> Search "No Uncertain Terms on iTunes or Stitcher or go to the Term Limits website to listen
> 
> Episode #9




the 2 parties are political factories....

if you set term limits then (D) A. Smith or (R) A. Jones won't be allowed to serve more than X terms BUT the parties will have cogs ready to replace them....(D) B. Smith or (R) B. Jones...

The parties keep investing in and training future "leaders"...

so what good, really, is term limits?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 15, 2018)

We already have term limits, they’re called *elections.*

The people have the fundamental right to elect whomever they want for as long as they want.

If one has an issue with the political process in his state or with his state’s elected representatives, then he needs to become involved in that political process, not pursue lazy, inane ‘solutions’ such as term limits.


----------



## doesanyoneknowmyname (Oct 15, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> We already have term limits, they’re called *elections.*
> 
> The people have the fundamental right to elect whomever they want for as long as they want.
> 
> If one has an issue with the political process in his state or with his state’s elected representatives, then he needs to become involved in that political process, not pursue lazy, inane ‘solutions’ such as term limits.




I suspect that "term limits" (as devised by conservatives and/or republicans) will somehow TARGET dems while being yet another devious advantage (cheating) for repubs.


----------



## ddbirdy (Oct 15, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> We already have term limits, they’re called *elections.*



One of the things I learned from the "No Undertain Terms" podcast that they stress a lot is how people say "we already have term limits, theyre called elections." That is NOT THE CASE!!! In most states we dont even HAVE elections because the incumbant wins re-election nine times out of ten because of the corruption they have on their side, so people dont even TRY to run. We DONT have Elections!!! Listen to the podcast !!! Its called "No Uncertain Terms" by US Term Limits


----------



## Olde Europe (Oct 16, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> We already have term limits, they’re called *elections.*
> 
> The people have the fundamental right to elect whomever they want for as long as they want.
> 
> If one has an issue with the political process in his state or with his state’s elected representatives, then he needs to become involved in that political process, not pursue lazy, inane ‘solutions’ such as term limits.



That, I'd say, is by and large correct for elected representatives.  There is one objection that should be considered in case well-heeled, entrenched party machines, either under the control of representatives, or controlling representatives, create safe districts to the effect that an incumbent for all intents and purposes serves for life.

Elected heads of state are a vastly different matter, though, as long-term incumbency might lead, through patronage and personal loyalties, to heads of the executive to marshal the power of the office / state for their personal gain and electoral success, or even abolish elections altogether, so that the lack of term limits becomes a threat to democracy itself.  So, securing the right of the people "to elect whomever they want", term limits for the CinC are a serious, and reasonable consideration.


----------

