They should have it for the same reason they should have aspirin its called for.

What happens when 6 of 9 tell you term limits aren’t real exactly?

No because 6 out of 9 can pretend term limits are illegal if passed by law and a constitutional amendment that harms either sides power is practically impossiblle.

If implemented prior I think they would as likely have ended in a court as bad or worse

Nobody who splits his own sides vote can win mathematically. To simplify you need side /2 - loss from infighting > opposition.

By continuing to shit on your own side you tend not only to draw votes for yourself you tend to decrease turnout, enthusiasm, and tell the other sides story for them. All with zero hope of actually winning because you will never out earn the default party vote. EG if just 10% just vote for the official party members it doesn’t matter if you convince 55% of the remaining side to side with you you’ve already lost.

This is why this strategy hasn’t worked this century.

Please pray tell when has a major election been won by a fellow running against his own side? Be specific. Remember major impact elections like Mayor of NYC +

If he knows what he is doing cannot possibly lead to his own success, splitting the blue vote can’t lead to him winning, then he is deliberately trying to put the nazis in power over his citizens knowing some of them will be harmed. He’s absolutely a collaborator.

Again you confuse cause and effect term limits could have easily meant justices losing their seats during Bush and Trump bringing about the same effect or worse. If we had gotten luckier or smarter with strategic resignation we could be talking about lifetime appointments keeping the judiciary independent from the president and protecting democracy.

If the people coming in are corrupt getting new corrupt people every term limit isn’t going to make them less corrupt. It is the fact that lawmakers are so beholden to money to get and stay in office that leads to corruption in the first place. In your alternative America a lawmaker would be expecting to need somewhere to land after they hit the limit and would be more beholden to industry not less.

Wherein we successfully elect people who aren’t beholden to money we needn’t kick them out right after they learn the ropes if the people keep showing their confidence in them by voting them in.

Term limits ensures that you always have a new incompetence congress finding their footing before being replaced by new newbies forever out of step.

Also it can simultaneously be true that term limits increase corruption and we at present are fully incapable of reigning in corruption of any kind because we are bad immoral people on average. Your position is like arguing that cigs don’t kill you because your presently already dying of liver cancer right now.

There are many other actual holidays a sufficient staff can handle busy days