Is an interesting question. For one, it looks like a must, you (and all of us in other countries have our own...) really need to get rid of your Pelosis and such, people who can stay in power and run things for the benefit of none but themselves and their allies for decades, well into their dementia years.

On the other hand, if you have limits to the years anyone can serve you also limit the years of those people who actually may be able to serve their country well and do good.

And then there is the question of experience. If you do play with a revolving door of people running your country, you may end up with too inexperienced ones having to play games with some old wily foxes of other countries which do not have limits to how long anybody can stay on top at times, with the end result maybe being that you will be at the losing end due to that.

On the gripping hand, what presumably draws more than enough of people who just want the power and don't really give a damn about the people or even their country except where it concerns their personal situation and profits is at least partly the fact that there are no limits, once somebody learns how to act in order to stay there and in power they can have a lifelong career for themselves. At a position where they can wield power over others and gain material profits. Something people with certain types of personality disorders can find an irresistible lure, so there presumably is a lot of them in politics, all trying to become the next Pelosi, or maybe the next president, although the president's position does have that pesky problem of term limits.

Which again makes the idea of term limits, and the fewer terms the better, sound like a good idea. Might even discourage the power seeker types at least a little.