Dead Presidents

I think that Eisenhower and Reagan probably would have been tempted to seek a third term, if possible.  They both had health problems during their Presidencies, but I could see Eisenhower seeking a third term anyway.  He had a difficult time stepping away, which is one reason why he waited so long to give Richard Nixon a solid endorsement in 1960.  It wasn’t necessarily a lack of confidence in Nixon’s abilities, but partly because Ike felt that he (Ike) was still the best man for the job. 

Reagan, like Clinton, loved being President, too.  But when Reagan left office in 1989, he was about two weeks away from his 78th birthday and, according to his official biographer, Edmund Morris, there were signs that he may have been facing the early stages of his Alzheimer’s in the last few weeks of his Administration.  Since President Reagan looked relatively healthy and definitely looked fit for his age, it’s difficult for people to realize that he was almost a full eight years older than Eisenhower (70) was when Ike left office.  Even if Eisenhower had served another term, Ike still would have been four years younger than Reagan at the end of that third term.  I think Reagan’s age and deteriorating health would have prevented him from a third term if it was Constitutionally possible.  As closely as his public image was protected by Nancy Reagan, there is no way she would have stood by while he hung on for another term and publicly started to suffer from serious Alzheimer’s symptoms.

An interesting thing is that, if they had the opportunity to run for a third term and their health allowed it, I think Eisenhower, Reagan, and Clinton all would have been easily elected to another term.  I think George W. Bush would have had a much more difficult time with seeking a third term, if possible.  However, I don’t think Bush would have run again even if he was Constitutionally eligible.  In those last few months of 2008, President Bush looked SO ready to get back to Texas.  Even if his chances of being re-elected were positive, I still think he would have chosen retirement instead of a third term.

As for the second part of your question, I think that Truman would have stepped away in 1952, no matter what.  All Truman ever wanted to do was remain a U.S. Senator.  When he was suggested as a potential Vice Presidential candidate, he was not interested, and when others reminded him that President Franklin D. Roosevelt likely wouldn’t survive the term, Truman declared that he didn’t want to be President either.  Of course, he was elected Vice President and as in the case of almost every VP who succeeds to the Presidency, once Truman got to the White House he wanted to be elected to a term in his own right.  Still, before Eisenhower declared that he was a Republican, Truman was suggesting that he (Truman) would be happy to step aside and be Eisenhower’s running mate if Ike wanted to run for President as a Democrat.  So, Harry Truman did not mind retiring home to Missouri in 1952, and I think he would have done so, no matter what.

LBJ’s case was different.  The fact that he was very nearly upset in the 1968 New Hampshire Democratic Primary by Eugene McCarthy really shook President Johnson up and showed that he was vulnerable.  If there wasn’t a serious challenge from within his own party — first from McCarthy and then from RFK — LBJ would have stayed in that race in 1968.  Despite his withdrawal from the race, deep down LBJ still had a flicker of hope that the Democratic National Convention would be deadlocked, turn to the outgoing LBJ, draft him into the race, nominate him, and he’d be the conquering hero, vanquishing Nixon and bringing the Vietnam War to an end.  

LBJ was also a man of contradictions, though.  Throughout his life, he always said that he would die young because all of the men in his family died by the time they were 64 or 65.  As much as Johnson was addicted to power and craved the love of the American people (something that he never received like JFK did, which “broke his heart” according to Richard Nixon), he was also deeply worried that another four years in the White House would kill him.  Worse yet, he would suffer an incapacitating stroke like Woodrow Wilson.  LBJ often had a nightmare where he fell ill like Wilson and was an invalid — a shell of a once-powerful man bedridden or feebly being rolled through the White House in a wheelchair.  It was an macabre thing to think about, but it was something that frequently haunted President Johnson, especially because he had suffered a near-fatal massive heart attack in 1955 when he was Senate Majority Leader.  The confident, arrogant, impetuous, strong-willed LBJ wanted to take on Nixon and serve four more years in the White House.  The sensitive, insecure, depressed LBJ considered resigning, didn’t think he’d live through the next term (1969-1973), and often had to receive a pep talk from Lady Bird to get his act together and go to work.  So, with LBJ, it would actually depend on which LBJ you got on decision day when it comes to whether he would have sought a third term if not for the disastrous results of the 1968 New Hampshire Democratic Primary.

By the way, Lyndon Johnson died on January 22, 1973.  If he had served a third term, it would have ended on January 20, 1973, just two days prior to the day that he actually died.

I don’t like the idea of term limits at all, but if we’re going to have term limits for the Presidency (which, of course, we do), then I think the House and Senate should have term limits, as well.  I don’t like the fact that term limits are imposed on the President if Senators and Representatives can keep getting themselves elected (and basically wage a continuous campaign for their seat). 

I want to see a balance there, but I’d much rather see the 22nd Amendment abrogated so that Presidents can serve more than two terms.  The Founders didn’t place anything in the Constitution about term limits.  While every President for 150 years followed George Washington’s two-term tradition, it was just that — a tradition.  The 22nd Amendment was a knee-jerk reaction 65 years ago due to FDR being elected to four terms and the Democrats having what ended up being a 20-year hold on the White House. 

I think the best argument against term limits is the fact that Bill Clinton is only 66 years old, yet he’s been relegated to the sideline for what will soon be 12 years.  If not for the 22nd Amendment, Clinton could still be President today. and there are not too many people on either side of the aisle who weren’t better off during the Clinton years and wouldn’t feel confident with him at the helm  

GREAT question!

We’ll have to look at it two ways, as you mentioned.  First of all, there was no restriction on running for a third term until the 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951, and the first President actually affected by the 22nd Amendment was Dwight Eisenhower.  Grandfathering meant Truman wouldn’t have been affected by the restriction and could have ran for as many terms as he chose.

Secondly, we’re thinking about what would have transpired had Washington not set the two-term precedent and if none of the Presidents adhered to Washington’s tradition (only a few ever considering breaking the tradition).

With that said, here’s my answer, with some qualifications:

Andrew Jackson would have ran for a third term if he had been younger, and he absolutely would have been elected again.  When Jackson left office in 1837, he was nearly 70 years old and he very nearly resigned during his second term because of his poor health.  If Jackson had won the 1824 election (and, to be honest, he kind of did) instead of John Quincy Adams, I think he would have served from 1825-1837 if his health had allowed it.

A President would have to be elected to a second term to seek a third term, so we’ll skip from Jackson to Lincoln.  Lincoln was assassinated at the very beginning of his second term, so we’ll never know what would have happened if he had served eight years instead of four years and a month.

Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in 1880.  He had left office in 1877 and turned things over to Rutherford B. Hayes, but Hayes pledged to serve only one term when he made the compromise with Democrats which swung the 1876 election from Samuel J. Tilden to Hayes.  At the 1880 Republican National Convention, there was quite a bit of support for a third term for Grant and he actually led on the first 35 ballots of voting for the nominee.  Grant desperately wanted to be renominated, but things fell apart and James Garfield beat Grant for the nomination by just 66 votes.  Grant would have been the first President nominated for a third term if it weren’t for those 66 votes.

Theodore Roosevelt obviously attempted to run for a third term in 1912 after he had pledged to not run again in 1908.  TR immediately regretted his decision not to seek a third term in 1908 and hand over the White House to William Howard Taft.  TR was not even 50 years old when he left office and very few people loved being President as much as Roosevelt did.  Roosevelt was considering running for President in 1920, but he died at the beginning of 1919.  If he had run in 1920, Roosevelt — just 60 years old at the time — almost certainly would have been elected to a third term.

Woodrow Wilson also wanted to run for a third term in 1920.  Unfortunately for Wilson, he had been severely incapacitated by a stroke in 1919 and probably should have been forced to resign due to his health instead of lingering like a shadow until he turned the White House over to Warren Harding in 1921.  Even if he had been healthy, it’s unlikely that Wilson’s Democratic Party would have wanted to renominate the unpopular Wilson for a third term in 1920.

Once the 22nd Amendment came into play, it became impossible for Presidents after Eisenhower to seek a third term, but in my opinion, ALL of the Presidents since the 1950’s who had won a second term would have sought a third term, if possible.  Power is difficult to relinquish and the Presidency is the most powerful position in the world.  All of the Presidents were ambitious, ego-driven politicians and none of them willingly wanted to leave office.

Dwight Eisenhower was the first President affected by the 22nd Amendment’s restrictions and, despite being 70 years old in 1960, he personally felt that he was a better candidate for the Republicans than anyone else, especially the eventual nominee (and his own Vice President) Richard Nixon.

Ronald Reagan was even older than Eisenhower at the end of his second term — almost 78 years old and in questionable health — but Reagan also made it clear that he wished he could have run for a third term.  Eisenhower’s chances in 1960 would have been dicey; Reagan almost certainly would have been re-elected.

Bill Clinton, as you mentioned, was just 54 years old when he left office in 2001.  I think Clinton would have had a tough time running for a third term in 2000, but if he had retired and come back in 2004 to challenge George W. Bush, I think Clinton would have definitely been elected to a third term.  The nation approved of Clinton’s job in 2000, but I think most Americans needed a break from him.  By 2004, his return would have been a relief to most voters, especially with lackluster competition against Bush like John Kerry, John Edwards, Howard Dean, and Wesley Clark.

As for George W. Bush himself, I do think Bush would have sought a third term if Constitutionally eligible.  I don’t think he would have beaten any Democratic nominee, however.  In fact, to name-check William Jennings Bryan again, I think the Democrats could have dug him up in 2004 and he would have finally won a Presidential election if they had campaigned him against Bush.

Also, in case anyone was wondering, I think the restriction on Presidential terms is ridiculous and harmful to the Presidency.  It was explicitly not encoded within the Constitution by the Founding Fathers and I believe that was for the same reasons that the Founders didn’t put term limits on House members, Senators, or Supreme Court Justices.  The two-term limit is a handicap which shackles the President of the United States into being a lame duck who is always either playing defense by not taking political risks or being overprotective about his political capital for at least half of his Presidency — (during the run-up to mid-term Congressional elections and for 18 months prior to his own re-election).  I support the elimination of Presidential term limits (remember, they only were instituted within the past 60 years) or the creation of a single, six-year Presidential term if there has to be limits.