Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
But I think the term “consecutively” eliminates the need to count individual presidents that did not serve consecutive terms, as those who did are commonly regarded as one presidency.
If we only had 3 christian presidents, and the first and last were the same guy, we still had three consecutive christian presidents.
I don’t know. It’s a unique situation. But I don’t think saying “43 consecutive presidents” is necessarily wrong
I’m being pedantic, I know.
But I think the term “consecutively” eliminates the need to count individual presidents that did not serve consecutive terms, as those who did are commonly regarded as one presidency.
If we only had 3 christian presidents, and the first and last were the same guy, we still had three consecutive christian presidents.
I don’t know. It’s a unique situation. But I don’t think saying “43 consecutive presidents” is necessarily wrong