"I like working": Trump floats idea of third term, says he's "not joking"

Salon - Mar 30th, 2025

Donald Trump has hinted at the possibility of serving a third term as President, a move that would be unconstitutional under the 22nd Amendment. In a conversation with NBC's Kristen Welker, Trump suggested that many people want him to remain in office past 2028. Although he stated it was too early to consider such plans seriously, he did not dismiss the idea entirely. Trump mentioned that if Vice President JD Vance were to win the presidency and then cede it to him, he could serve another term. He avoided providing further details on other methods for extending his presidency.

The notion of a third presidential term for Trump raises significant constitutional and political questions. The 22nd Amendment, enforced after Franklin D. Roosevelt's four terms, explicitly limits presidents to two terms. Overturning this would require substantial legislative support, including a two-thirds majority in Congress and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. A proposal by Tennessee GOP Rep. Andy Ogles to allow non-consecutive third terms could open the door for Trump, though it excludes others like Barack Obama. The potential pursuit of extended terms underscores ongoing debates about the future of American democracy and executive power.

Donald Trump Us Politics Jd Vance Us Presidency Constitutional Law 22nd Amendment Kristen Welker

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The story presents an intriguing and timely topic about Donald Trump's potential interest in a third term as president. While it successfully captures public interest and touches on controversial issues, the article suffers from a lack of balance and depth. It primarily presents Trump's perspective without adequately exploring counterarguments or expert opinions, resulting in a somewhat one-sided narrative. The absence of direct sourcing and detailed context diminishes the story's accuracy and transparency. Despite these shortcomings, the article remains engaging and accessible, provoking thought and discussion about presidential term limits and the potential for constitutional changes. Overall, the story could benefit from more comprehensive sourcing and balanced analysis to enhance its credibility and impact.

Accuracy

The story presents claims about Donald Trump considering a third term in office, which aligns with his past comments about the idea. It correctly states that this would be unconstitutional due to the 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951, which limits presidents to two terms. However, the story lacks precise sourcing for Trump's quotes and the context of the interview with NBC's Kristen Welker. The mention of Rep. Andy Ogles proposing an amendment is factual, but the article doesn't provide sufficient evidence or quotes from Ogles or other authoritative sources to substantiate this claim fully. The suggestion that Trump could take office if JD Vance won the presidency and ceded it to him is speculative and lacks concrete evidence.

Balance

The article primarily presents Trump's perspective and potential scenarios for a third term without offering substantial counterarguments or perspectives from constitutional experts or political analysts. This creates an imbalance, as the story doesn't explore the broader implications or the feasibility of such a move. The lack of diverse viewpoints, especially from those who might oppose or critique the idea, results in a somewhat one-sided narrative that could have benefited from a more balanced exploration of the topic.

Clarity

The article is written in a straightforward manner, making its main claims and narrative easy to follow. The language is clear, and the structure logically presents the idea of Trump considering a third term. However, the lack of detailed sourcing and context can confuse readers who seek to understand the full picture. While the tone remains neutral, the absence of comprehensive background information on the constitutional limits and political ramifications reduces the overall clarity.

Source quality

The article references an interview with NBC's Kristen Welker but does not provide direct quotes from the interview or a link to the source material. This lack of direct sourcing diminishes the reliability of the claims. Additionally, the story mentions Rep. Andy Ogles' proposal without citing a direct statement or official documentation. The absence of authoritative sources or experts discussing the constitutional implications further weakens the article's source quality.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency regarding the sources of its information and the context in which Trump's statements were made. It does not explain the methodology behind the claims, nor does it provide insight into any potential conflicts of interest or biases. The absence of links to primary sources or interviews reduces the transparency of the article, making it difficult for readers to verify the information independently.