Some countries have fixed terms, where the election is set to be held a certain time after the last election, whereas some (like the UK) have the election date set at the convenience of the current prime minister, with some fixed (albeit loosely) maximum term. In addition to this, we have term limits in some countries (USA) and not in others (UK), meaning that George Bush can’t stand again, but Tony Blair can.
What do you think of these systems? Myself, I favour fixed terms, and limited terms (so only 2 terms per PM, and fixed duration). I think it’s good to be forced to get ‘fresh blood’ into the top job at least every 8-9 years, and I think being able to fix the election date gives too much of an advantage to the currently ruling party, as they can basically keep an eye on the polls, and the economy, and pick the best moment.
I know some of you are from the US, what do you think of the fact that Bush can’t stand again, and that Clinton couldn’t stand again? Is it dangerous to be ruled by a leader who knows full well he need not care about re-election?