• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Actually it was only limited in the 1950s when Truman was in charge.

If I'm not mistaken, the exact same argument took place early in the thread. Then BBB said that the limit was in place so everybody had a chance of running for office
 
Is he allowed to run again if he wins this election?

No. Even though it's not illegal in 1845, it was still common courtesy for presidents to only serve two terms. Only FDR ever served more, and that was a very special circumstance of Depression-WWII.
 
No. Even though it's not illegal in 1845, it was still common courtesy for presidents to only serve two terms. Only FDR ever served more, and that was a very special circumstance of Depression-WWII.

Ok, so we may see a huge shift a Democrat votes next election if they are indeed voting to keep a shift from happening during a war.
 
Actually, I think it's 2 terms, just like IRL
((FDR would like a chat with you. :p
However, 2 terms would make sense, as it was later legislated that presidents couldn't serve more than 2 terms, and I don't think many presidents other than FDR even tried to get a third term, much less actually got one (attributed to Washington's refusal to take another term, and probably just every president getting sick of it too). It's not that realistic for a president to take or try for three terms, and it could be less interesting for the AAR too.))

The construction of a continent spanning railroad is essential for the future of our nation. It is the next great task of America, to bridge the oceans. It is essential for bringing people together, for encouraging industry all across the continent, for supporting our military, and for making the lives of settlers here and there all much finer.

What we need is just capital and impetus from the government - not a great cost, but a fair one for all involved, and the organization which allows the project to fully construct (for such a massive project does not spontaneously form of itself). It needs the structure of organization. It also needs guidance. Of course, a line or lines must be set in ways which do not overly inconvenience settler communities (although giving a just payment for them, allowing them movement to a nearby area, and then supporting them with the new providence of the rail line nearby will add to the convenience of many of them, if done right). It also must not infringe on the rights of man in unfairly treating the natives of the land.

I propose that an Indian Railroad Committee be formed as part of the organization for determining the route and process of the rail line. Careful negotiations must be sent to the tribes through whose lands the line would go, with offers of compensation for land taken from them.

This compensation would be negotiated fairly with each tribe - deciding on what they really wanted - but could include:
- Free passage and other rights over the railroad owned lands in their territories.
- Joint ownership in the line which passes over their lands, earning part of the profits from its construction (in fact, I believe that perhaps we may employ many Indians to help survey, negotiate lands, defend the workers, cater and provide provisions for the workers, et cetera. In return for these services the tribes might be considered a co-owner of the railroad).
- Free travel of all tribe members (currently living, or for a set number of generations) along the rail lines, or free transport of certain goods.
- Construction or ownership of railroad stations along their sections of the line, with profit and development nearby being in their hands.
 
Maybe all this talk of a tans-continental railroad could be waited until after the elections and the war is won, then a plan for where the railroad would be built could be made, thus settling many details of this plan and paving the way for a sooner building of such railroad.
 
Maybe all this talk of a tans-continental railroad could be waited until after the elections and the war is won, then a plan for where the railroad would be built could be made, thus settling many details of this plan and paving the way for a sooner building of such railroad.

I agree (I will vote against any plans for a railway.)
 
Maybe all this talk of a tans-continental railroad could be waited until after the elections and the war is won, then a plan for where the railroad would be built could be made, thus settling many details of this plan and paving the way for a sooner building of such railroad.

Agreed. When the writer of the bill is defending it by saying he has no idea what he's talking about, you know something's up.
 
Or maybe we are talking about making something out of land that is currently overwhelmingly empty. What use to us is any of this land if almost no one lives there and it's completely undeveloped. Developing it without needing to raise a cent of taxes is not only good for the nation but overwhelmingly beneficial to the local residents. Who's rights are being defended here? It's a very simple matter to put the railroad through the vast majority of the fertile land in the west that is currently unoccupied.
 
Or maybe we are talking about making something out of land that is currently overwhelmingly empty. What use to us is any of this land if almost no one lives there and it's completely undeveloped. Developing it without needing to raise a cent of taxes is not only good for the nation but overwhelmingly beneficial to the local residents. Who's rights are being defended here? It's a very simple matter to put the railroad through the vast majority of the fertile land in the west that is currently unoccupied.

What about the roaming herds of buffalo and the natives that live off of those herd's survival? Would not the railroad quickly cut down the size of land available for these buffalo to roam, thus diminishing their size and that too of the natives? I have no love for these savages, after years of fighting them for our nation, but they do not deserve such a fate as death by starvation.
 
Kill every living create in sight, plop down a railroad built by slave labour from the South, wherein the United States Government would pay for the slaves to become their owners, while at the same time freeing the slaves once construction is completed, and compensate the now free slaves with land out west.

This would be a compromise between those radical Northerners and the kind-hearted and gentle Southerners on a wide array of issues.
 
Gentlemen, with my presidential campaign prevented from ever even beginning, I've redirected my energies elsewhere.

1. I fully intend to, should the Whig party gain a majority in Congress, run with the party caucus for the Speakership of the House - and even if we do not win a majority to run for Minority Speaker.

2. I fully intend, once the new congress takes place, to officially establish the George Washington Caucus (and with the help of my friends, hopefully a similar senate grouping) to embody our nation's founding principles of a strong central government, congressional supremacy, judicial review, a professional standing army (as opposed to a conscript army), federal supervision and regulation of the state and regional militias as per the requirements of the Constitution, and America's freedom from entangling foreign alliances.

3. With the money I would have spent campaigning for president, I have been travelling across this great country of ours and sponsoring the formation of George Washington societies, sharing these principles, among the citizenry.

I hope you will join me on this crusade.
 
What about the roaming herds of buffalo and the natives that live off of those herd's survival? Would not the railroad quickly cut down the size of land available for these buffalo to roam, thus diminishing their size and that too of the natives? I have no love for these savages, after years of fighting them for our nation, but they do not deserve such a fate as death by starvation.
Any settlement would cut down on this size, and settlement of the West is inevitable with the growing populations (even if it were just the Indians themselves). The actual railroads themselves would take up very little grazing land away from the buffalo directly.

I would suggest several acts for the establishment of a more stable and sustainable status between Indians and other settlers in the West, by which both groups may live more in peace.

- First, with the establishment of railroads and other government land deals (such as obtaining land for forts, or for other settlements), treaties shall be arranged giving the Indians who reside in those lands sufficient free space to continue their normal pursuits, or to sell to settlers should they adapt to new ways which use less space.
- Bills shall be passed supplying funding to provide Indians with technologies and capital necessary to develop more prosperous and compact livelihoods, should they desire it. In return for supplying these things to willing tribes, the government shall gain the rights to some portion of their former (and now less needed) lands, and we could expect more to be sold to other settlers as well.
- Herds of buffalo and other animals crucial to the survival of the various Indian tribes shall be protected from overhunting and fishing. In territories owned by the Indians, the shooting of such animals (aside from exceptional cases, such as self defense) shall be prohibited for all non-Indians. On tribal lands bought from the Indians, the shooting of such animals shall be regulated among non-Indians and shall be only for the provision of food or locally required products for non-Indian settlers.
- Tribes may exempt their land from the above clause in treaties if they so wish, instead obtaining more funding for their integration into developed society.
- Free public education shall be made available to the tribes, distributed in ways which are not inconvenient for the nomadic or spread out lifestyles of some tribes. They shall be taught English, to better communicate with other settlers, as well as other subjects such as arithmetic and politics, and useful trades.
- According to their populations, tribes shall be allowed to send representatives to a common council of tribes in each territory, which may coordinate amongst themselves, and may advise and direct territory wide policies and actions much like councils of other settlers.
 
Does the Senator mean to suggest that he envisions the buffalo might run out one day? That seems a rather fanciful notion indeed!