Seconded, mostly because of the Elective Monarchies. I would even argue further that Elective Monarchy is a sub-trope of this one and since that's got its own Real Life examples it's supertrope shouldn't be banned.
It's also entirely possible in places with out term limits for an official to keep being elected until death or their voluntary retirement. My most recent local election had half the Councillors run unopposed and two of those were unopposed at the election before that with no claims of corruption. Its just that the current incarnation of the City Council is extremely popular due to the investment put into the city.
Thirded. This isn't necessarily a bad trope- some politicians (such as Hazel Mc Callion, the Mayor of Mississauga (just outside of Toronto)) are still beloved even though they've been in power for so long. I also think impressive feats of electoral success should be celebrated, not diminished.
Fourthed, if only because of what appears to be a contradiction in how the page Administrivia.No Real Life Examples Please describes its trope. The project page claims that this trope does not refer to a dictator. It also claims that holding office for several consecutive terms somehow differs from holding office "permanently". So what does that leave for this trope?
The crowner has been added.
Edited by 24.1.102.183
It's been called in favor of keeping it on NRLEP, but no one has offered a replacement reason other than a claim that real-life consecutive unopposed reelections are People Sit on Chairs.
Propose elimination of the No Real Life Examples. The justification is frankly asinine and self-defeating. If we were talking about dictators, we hardly would be featuring examples such as Mayor Quimbly. And even if we do somehow bend things to accommodate the "No Term Limits" thing, there's the little matter of Supreme Court Justices and similar positions, in addition to (arguably) old Elective Monarchies.
Hide / Show Replies