General Discussion

If you don't even know their name, how are you to judge whether or not they're doing a good job representing your interests and values?

If name recognition is the only criteria by which a significant percent of voters cast their ballots, then we have a problem that goes much deeper than term limits.

Did the Dingells do a good job? If yes, why cast them out simply because constituents were familiar with them? If not, then they should be voted out.

By the way, the part of my post you quoted was not about people in office. It was about potential public servants who would like to make a career in elected office, but would choose a different career knowing they would have to start a different career after x-number of terms.

I think more harm than good would come by disqualifying an elected representative just because they've won x-number of elections. There may be a very positive reason why constituents decide to keep them in office.

There might be actual unfair advantages for incumbents, worthy of discussion. I'd bet that mostly has to do with the pernicious influence of money in politics, whilich can actually cut both ways. Another is the media environment, which is another huge can of worms.