>Limiting terms might get Stokes and other do-nothing name recognition politicians out of office, but it will also limit the terms of people who do a good job representing their constituents and/or have a wealth of experience. Why shouldn't I be allowed to reelect someone I like for real reasons if I want to? Further, this will do nothing whatsoever to improve the quality of candidates that will replace the term limited ones. The developers and grifters funding the current asshole you want out will never run out of replacement assholes to fund. Real change requires a sustained political fight, and it still will with term limits.

Thanks for the thoughtful comment. This was the hardest one for me to wrap my head around cause I can see some merits on both sides. It's never sat right with me the way politicians feel entitled to hold on to power indefinitely. But I take all of your points.