system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
US Presidents should serve one six year term without the ability to be re-elected. CMV

As it stands, a four year presidency is a short amount of time to initiate new policies, test to see if those policies work, and foster new plans should they need re-adjusting.  Thus, to make any long-lasting impact, each president strategically expends their political capital to make just enough changes as to satisfy their base, while constantly keeping an eye out for re-election threats and opportunities.  It's only in one's 2nd term do we really get to see a President in their true form, without their constant pandering to the masses.

I submit that a single six year term, without the possibility of re-election, gets the best of both worlds.  We get single-minded leadership focused on national priorities, without ever being swayed or influenced by the temptation to curb their goals in order to foster votes.  Six years is enough time to implement positive changes, but also long enough to undo mistakes from the previous presidency, should that be necessary.

I also submit that amending the constitution to make this change would be relatively straightforward and few would argue against it.
gpt
How would changing the executive power, affect the legislative? The congress is the problem when doing new policies, not the president. The president could be God almighty, and the congress would still bicker and crap on changes in the name of money.