I have some sympathy for term limits. However, in some sense they are just surrender, in that we concede we can't get the bums out of office through elections, so we just limit their ability to do damage. Restoring competitive elections, if possible, would IMHO be better. But it may not be possible.
Also, I wonder what people who live in states with term limits think. Are they working? Is governance better? California has gotten into a huge mess while they have a term-limited legislature, but it may not be fair to blame their problems on that.
Also, federal term limits would have to be done via constitutional amendment, which would be very difficult. At the federal level I wonder what else might work.
Term limits are in no way different from requiring a two-thirds majority vote for some actions, and certainly NOT any kind of "surrender". Given the advantage of incumbency (which will ALWAYS exist, simply due to name recognition if nothing else), "competitive elections" are simply not possible. If anybody believes that they are, I have a bridge across Puget Sound that is for sale.
"Also, federal term limits would have to be done via constitutional amendment, which would be very difficult. At the federal level I wonder what else might work."
Yes, it WOULD be difficult, but nothing else stands a snowball's chance in hell of working.