[angkor]

As much as you or I don't like it, It's a debatable question.

Sure it's debatable on FR, or elsewhere.

But if Bill Clinton ever attempts to run for VP, he will quickly be shot down on the intent of the 22nd.

The USSC does not rely on semantic games, it looks at intent, which in this case is very clear.

Former presidents cannot run again under the aegis of Vice President. Simple.

[goldstategop]

You're right it'll never happen. Otoh, with a creature of Clinton's character with his demonstrated disdain for the Constitution, he's not likely to let the 22nd Amendment stand in his way any more than he let his oath of office stand in his way. Its possible enough people might buy his semantic hairsplitting to give him another crack at the White House. We've seen them buy it before.

[Poohbah]

Do you have any specific support for your claim regarding the intent? For example, do the records of Congressional debate for the 22nd Amendment support said claim?

[Iota]

But if Bill Clinton ever attempts to run for VP, he will quickly be shot down on the intent of the 22nd.

I'm arguing the plain text of the Constitution, and you're arguing that the plain text should be ignored in favor of the intent behind that text. This should be setting off warning bells in your head.

Not to mention that you've got no evidence of what the intent was behind the 22nd Amendment -- but I'll bet you I can come up with some to show it was aimed at future FDRs rather than future Reagans or Clintons.