I approve of many Dems, and disapprove strongly of Feinstein, so I'm sympathetic to the thrust of that argument... but I fear that might be throwing the baby ou

I approve of many Dems, and disapprove strongly of Feinstein, so I'm sympathetic to the thrust of that argument... but I fear that might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. If the only result of enacting term limits was Feinstein getting kicked out, I'd be all for it. But it affects far more politicians than her. The natural counterargument is that there are probably other ways of dealing with the Feinstein problem without the nuclear option of term limits. Specifically, the party doesn't field a credible contender to her, as she's right up in the core of the party elite. "Top 2" was supposed to encourage challenges from contenders similar to the party incumbents, but I think we'd be better served by a proportional representation system (STV or similar). And if the core problem is that the party parachutes in stooges and backs them with the full weight of the party's campaign funding and infrastructure, then I don't see how term limits solve the problem; out with Feinstein, in with another party-blessed elitist who only cares about surveillance when it is used on fellow members of the elite [1]. I'm sure they can find someone who has not served a day in public service to carry on her agenda. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/nsa-surveillance-dianne-feinstein-opposed-allies https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/28/nsa-surveillan...