Opinion | Trump's third considerations are part of a pattern

When the Republicans took control of the congress in 1947, they were still angry that President Franklin D. Roosevelt had won a fourth term in 1944, and they wanted to adopt a constitutional change to the restriction of future presidents to two sentences. John Jennings, Republican of Tennessee, stood on the house floor and said a 22nd change was necessary to prevent a dictator from taking over the country.

“Without such a border to the number of terms a man in the presidency, the time can come when a man becomes president with the profit of ambition,” said Jennings on February 6, 1947. One man who supports and overcome the Safeguards of the constitution with a “submissive congress” and a compliant Supreme Court. Such law could use the great powers of the office to tilt the political system in his favor and to recruit repeated re -election.

In the decades after the country ratified the 22nd change in 1951 in 1951, the members of both parties occasionally directed his restrictions, but until recently no sitting president openly left him. The warning of Mr. Jennings on the house floor now looks prophetic: President Trump is a man with vault ambition. The congress is largely subject to its agenda. And he always mentions the idea of ​​a third term.

“I suspect I will not run again if you don't say,” he is so good, we have to find out something else, “he said shortly after his re -election last November. Although the Republicans giggled in the room at the time, he said in March that he” didn't joke “and that” there are methods that could be done “.

Last weekend he both seemed to step down and repeat the idea. “It is something that you shouldn't do according to my best knowledge,” Mr. Trump told NBC News. But then he again claimed that the decision was his decision. “Well, there are opportunities to do it,” he said. In the meantime, his website continues to sell “Trump 2028” merchants, including baseball caps for $ 50 per piece and $ 36 T-shirts, which announces: “Write down the rules again”.

This conversation may be is usually a tactical attempt to ward off the stigma of a lame duck. The Republicans of the Congress have partially reacted to it by gently disagreeing, and partly by downplaying the idea as a joke. “Not without changing the constitution,” said Senator John Thune, the majority leader, reporters in March. He added: “I think you asked the question again and again, and I think he's probably enjoying it and probably playing with you.”