>

The legitimate answer to that question is that FDR won so many times in a row that there was a push by republicans to limit the amount of times a president can run so they could actually win.
Executives in other countries don’t have term limits though, which is why Merkel led Germany for so long.
I also don’t think that the president is comparable to a senator or house rep. The president is one individual who possesses a huge amount of authority while a senator/rep is one of many individuals. I can see the logic of limiting someone so powerful the two terms, although I actually disagree with doing that personally. If someone is good at what they are doing and people like them, what is the point of limiting their ability to serve?
Proof he is the most to blame for what our government has become over the decades he has been in office. >

That’s really nothing to be proud of anymore. >

The old turtle definitely knows how to play the game. I’ll give him that. >

He’s an amoral power addict but he’s brilliant at playing the political long game. I loathe him but I’ll give the devil his due. >

Proof that if there is a God he/she/it/them is at best indifferent, and probably leaning toward malevolent. >

Senators and Representatives need term limits. >

I’m genuinely curious why people believe this. Isn’t an election enough? If someone is representing people the way they want to be represented, shouldn’t they be able to be elected? >

Then why is there term limits of President of the United States?  Tell me that?