Ageism is an appallingly-bad basis on which to invoke calls for retirement. Although I have a love-hate relationship with IT, the people in that job category (they're certainly not professionals, according to the usual definition of the word) tend to be introverted and have numerous personality quirks that make them problematic people on many levels.
However, I do NOT discount people because of relative incompetence in a field where I happen to excel. So long as their character is fine and they can interact with most people in a humane, understanding way, that's perfectly fine with me.
Now, as to the people I have called "the geriatric kindergarteners," e.g., Pelosi, Chuck Grassley, Diane Feinstein, et al., I don't poke fun at them because they're in their dotage. Rather, I go after them because they act like children in many ways, and it's a shame that they have the power they have when so little good comes of it.
When Pelosi was voted in as Speaker of the House in December 2018, she had the opportunity to go after Trump via impeachment right away. Instead, she counseled caution, month after month. If it were me, I would have adopted Napoleon's (and Patton's) phrase: "L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!" I would have hit Trump with everything possible, since he had done so many terrible, impeachable things already. Her Casper Milquetoast foray into impeachment on the grounds of the Ukraine scandal was ridiculously tepid, and really made a mountain out of a molehill.
Instead, there were the violations of the Emoluments Clause, his misuse of government powers for personal gain, etc. which would have provided rich fodder to feed the maw of the Impeachment Machine--and there was so much there that he would likely have been convicted in the Senate, notwithstanding the existence of Mitch McConnell.
Alas, we'll never know. But please don't use ageist arguments, when it is the decisions people make based on their character that determines whether they deserve to stay in office.