Term limits are elemental to a functional democracy. But can they also have ill effects on the public good?

One of the top priorities of a president's first term is to be reelected. During that period, it's critical they remain broadly popular by looking out for the interests of as much of the electorate as possible.

During a second term, all bets are off. Because reelection is not possible, a president can spend that time rewarding friends and allies with little regard for the political ramifications. Being in a position to accumulate vast and sustainable private influence, favor, and wealth can be well worth the cost of grave yet temporary unpopularity.

In principle, presidential terms are good for "capital-D Democracy." But are they good for our democracy?