>>19476115 pb

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

When we have a extremely talented and ethical leader who is willing to sacrifice in order to lead the nation, then term limits are unnecessary and a hindrance.

At the same time, incompetents and other mediocraties, who have colluded with organized crime that has corrupted the political process and thus have control over the election systems, hate term limits.

The problem isn't term limits, and the solution isn't term limits.

To even talk of term limits is to entirely miss the point.

If the election system is working correctly, and if the public is informed fully by a correctly functioning new media, then incompetents and other mediocraties will be flushed-out of power as needed. No need for term limits.

And highly talented, outstanding leaders can continue to be elected, and serve the public interest unhindered by short-sighted, regulations that provide a superficial solution at best to the real cause of the problems: corruption and endemic criminality.

>>19478119

That's interesting.

It could indicate any number of things, though.

Was there always a sheriff in place, or was it a position that was filled only when circumstances necessitated?

ie in the early days, it was a temp position, for a short term only. ??

Early days is 1800s? That makes it pretty darned interesting too! :D

Also it makes a big difference when there is only 100 or so (strong and vigilent) people in the community, and so the vote count in an election was easily (and by default) checked and rechecked, and thus next to impossible to rig by corrupt individuals.

Each time an election is held, it actually records the will and knowledge of the people.

How shameful that today, we (or at least I do) look upon the election results as not such a record of the people's will, but something rather far different.

>>19478319

imagine the sound