>

Bro Feinstein will be 97 by the time her term ends if she wins 2024 and there are rumours that she is mentally not completely capable to serve due to her old age. It’s high time we see young leaders from solid blue states who will most likely have long career and can run for other leadership positions (speaker, majority leader or even president)
Dianne Feinstein's term is up then and it is expected she will not announce another run. >

She announced last year that she intends to run in 2024. She'll be 90. I can't believe that's even legal. Can't wait for her to retire. >

Yeah, but Feinstein probably doesn't remember that she made that announcement, so she could change her mind. 
And it's hard to see the DSC or the California Democratic Party giving her much support if she does decide to run again. >

The Democrats were funding up right wing extremists in hopes that their center-left candidates would beat them. Kari Lake being a great example.
Don’t ever doubt how willing the Dems are to prop up a 90-year old corpse if it keeps them a complicit seat.
The corporate owned Democrats hate Porter. Trust and believe, they will support Feinstein over Porter. >

Adam Schiff is probably also going to run for the Senate seat. I expect the establishment money will go to him. >

Corporate Dems need to unshackle themselves from their preferred donors, and be more like Katie Porter. Problem with that is they’d never win another election, and repubs would turn the country into a theocratic hell hole, faster then they already are. >

Go Katie ! >

Good. Need to get some younger more in touch senators elected. Maybe the challenge gets Diane to decide it’s time to step aside >

Feinstein is not mentally capable of serving the Senate and is a fine example of the necessity of term limits >

Everywhere they've been tried, term limits have exacerbated every single issue Americans have with the political process.
Term limits increase legislators' reliance on special interest lobbyists, accelerate the rate at which legislators hit the revolving door and become lobbyists themselves, increase the polarization of individual politicians, parties, and legislatures, and also the degree to which those legislatures are gerrymandered. 
Moreover, states with term-limited legislators have lower voter turnout than states without, because term limits give more power to party apparatchiks at the expense of voters and civic interest groups.
Californians already know this, as their insistence on draconian term limits has turned the state legislature into a husk dominated by political machines playing back-room games to see who gets what seat while lobbyists write all the bills. >

People say they want term limits, but what they really want is a way to keep people from continuing to win elections despite the fact that they haven't spoken a coherent sentence in five years, or for someone with a terminal disease to win, just to drop dead during the middle of a political cycle and cause all sorts of chaos in their passing.
I have no idea what that solution looks like, but no, term limits aren't it. >

Upper age limit. 
You have to be 30 years old to run, so at 65 years old you are no longer allowed to run for office.
EZ PZ >

I feel like 65 might be a tad too young at this point.  
Honestly, I don't know that tying it to any hard number is a good idea.  
Maybe we can come up with some kind of basic fitness for office exam and make passing it a requirement of running. >

Yeah, I'm biased because I'm sick of these old dinosaurs getting to make decisions that don't affect them. 
At 65, retire and get out of the way for younger blood. It's not perfect but it's the best I've got. >

Katie will bring charts explaining so that a 5th grader understands that Feinstein has a staff propping her up and that she has dementia and should have retired years ago.