“Lame duck” is a term used to describe outgoing presidents, typically after the election of a new president and prior to the incumbent leaving office – as is the case currently regarding Joe Biden.
But what about Donald Trump, who, though the incoming president will be entering his second and final term, Constitutionally precluded from running again: is he a lame duck too?
When do you think the term “lame duck” most aptly applies? As for second-term presidents, are they generally in a position to govern more effectively, given that they are not bogged down with reelection concerns – such as policies that may alienate some voters – and an opposition party not focused on the incumbent’s successors, not on the incumbent?
POSTING/COMMENTING GUIDELINES
We encourage lively, thought-provoking discussions conducted with dignity and decorum. We reserve the right to remove any comments that are deemed abrasive and directed toward any member. No president is off limits, but we adhere to the longstanding tradition of refraining from fully evaluating presidents who have not been out of office for at least 20 years. While negative criticism of specific presidents is allowed, here’s what’s appropriate and what is not.
Appropriate: “I think President___________was an ineffective president because…”
Inappropriate: “President __________ was an idiot!”
No. In theory and in practice, no U.S President is ever a ‘lame duck’ and their power is diminished by lame duck rhetoric. The term “lame duck” first originated as a terminology in the Stock Exchange in the 1700s to describe a defaulters. Then, in the 1800s, the terminology was used as political rhetoric referring to a president (or other elected official) who is nearing the end of their term and has limited political power or influence, typically because they are not running for re-election and have already been replaced or are about to be replaced by someone else. It is not necessarily tied to the number of terms served, but rather to the timing and the lack of political leverage.
In the context of a president, a “lame duck” president is usually someone who has already won their second term and is in the final months or year of their presidency. Since they cannot run for re-election again (as per the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidents to two terms), their ability to push through significant new policies or garner support can be reduced because their time in office is almost over.
I do not believe the idea of a “lame duck” applies to any incoming or outgoing president. Here’s why. A lame duck (by definition) is someone who is at the tail end of their time in office, with no more elections to contest, and limited ability to influence politics in their final period in office. Yet, no U.S. President is limited in political power or influence while in office. There is an obligation to continue said political power and influence until the official inauguration and installment of the next U.S. President occurs.
The executive powers in themselves give the U.S Presidency whole and undisturbed power and influence. This ranges from treaty power, pardon power to executive orders and being the Commander in Chief, along with still being U.S. President, which has significance in itself when it come to running the country and any of its affairs (domestically and abroad). These powers are hugely underrated. In fact, Trump pardoned people before his administration ended and most recently, Biden used his pardon powers before his administration ends. And this is merely one example.
Finally, I think most U.S. Presidents who had previous presidential experience will be more seasoned and accustomed to the Office of the U.S. Presidency and can navigate the processes and seemingly political nuances more effectively. And if the U.S. President is a savvy, business-minded expert, he or she will get the job done and most efficiently and effectively. There will always be some facet of the U.S. Presidency where politics will play a significant role. However, as we have seen, both the House and Senate usually come together and with the Office of the U.S. Presidency to strike a balance to make sure that the country’s best interests are the focus. This is needed more than ever now, so hopefully the lame duck rhetoric ceases and the real work can be done to make sure the country’s interests are protected.
It’s true, the president remains the president until the new president is sworn in. However, “lame duck” may apply to a president about to leave office, from the time period after the election to the new president’s inauguration. But to call a president a lame duck before that time, such as in the last year of his presidency is too much of a stretch, I think.
Greetings! Remember, comments on here need not be lengthy or annotated. “Short and sweet” sometimes works best to get a discussion flowing.
Happy holidays, everyone!