This story is adapted from the Slatest newsletter. You can sign up here to get it in your inbox every day.

Here’s a paradox for you: In overwhelming numbers, voters keep telling pollsters that they want upper age limits and term limits for members of Congress. At the same time, they keep voting to reelect long-serving lawmakers who are in their 70s and 80s.

Massachusetts offers the latest evidence. Older incumbents of all ideological stripes swept the state’s Democratic primaries Tuesday night. In the race for U.S. Senate, two-term Sen. Ed Markey, an 80-year-old progressive, easily dispatched the more moderate Rep. Seth Moulton, 47. Elsewhere, Reps. Richard Neal and Stephen Lynch, who are both in their 70s and have collectively been in office for more than six decades, fended off younger and leftier challengers.

So what’s really going on? Here are a few theories.

As the saying goes, age is but a number. Yet voters keep telling us it’s actually a lot more than that. At first glance, Markey’s win would seem to break a recent streak of older incumbents falling to more youthful candidates. So far this year, the losers include Rep. Adriano Espaillat of New York (71), Rep. Shri Thanedar of Michigan (71), and Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado (69). But Markey’s victory also fits a different pattern: In all three of those earlier races, the elder lawmaker lost to a more outspokenly progressive rival. And for Massachusetts Democrats contemplating who they wanted as their next senator, ideology was clearly more important than age.

When Moulton launched his campaign, he downplayed any real policy differences with Markey. “Sen. Markey is a good man, but it’s time for a new generation of leadership,” he said in his announcement video. Markey, though, hammered the issues where they did diverge—including the debate over transgender rights. After Kamala Harris lost in 2024, a defeat some Democrats attributed in part to a viral pro-Trump ad that argued “Kamala is for they/them,........

© Slate