Donald Trump, at 70, became the oldest president ever elected. And he’s set on breaking his own record this fall.

But so are his two main rivals. The two Democratic front runners — Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders — each would smash that record if elected. Sanders would become president at age 78. Biden would be 77. If either is elected, it will be the first time in history a president will have to live past 80 to complete a first term.

That surely raise questions for some voters: How likely are they to survive their term, and to remain physically and mentally strong? What about a second term? Trump would be nearly 75 at a second inauguration. Sanders would be 83 and Biden would be 82 at the start of a second term in 2025. As it stands, the oldest person ever to begin a second term was Ronald Reagan, at 69.

How much weight should voters give to candidates’ ages?

Dr. David Scheiner, President Barack Obama’s personal physician, has suggested voters need more information, beyond what the candidates choose to reveal, about their medical status. He reasons that, given the importance of the job, voters should know about any medical conditions that could impact a candidate’s ability to serve out their term or affect their mental capability.

But the American Federation for Aging Research views it differently. The federation, a non-profit that supports research on healthy aging, considered the longevity prospects of the 2020 candidates. It concluded all three contenders are not only likely to survive two terms, but to do so without encountering age-related physical or mental disabilities.

The federation based its projections on tables that life insurance companies use to predict the risk of death and disability.

At first glance, the method might seemed flawed. The tables are based on averages. Plus, an actual insurance-related review would also consider medical records, medical test results, and assorted longevity-related factors, such as smoking status, body mass index and longevity of parents.

· RELATED: Super Tuesday’s surprise winner: Pennsylvania, because the primary should matter after all

· RELATED: Trump comes to Joe Biden’s turf in Pa., but pays scant attention to Democratic rival

But the federation argues those things don’t make much difference with presidential candidates. For one, they are typically among the subgroup of Americans likely to enjoy the longest, healthiest lives. They are people of high income and educational attainment. That puts them among the most likely to have received quality health care and to have lived the kind of lifestyle that leads to long life.

Beyond that, history shows that people who run for president or become president tend to outlive their peers. They tend to be more physically and mentally robust than the average person, and to retain those qualities longer. They display it during the very act of running for president.

“They have these incredibly vigorous travel schedules the rest of us would wilt under,” says Jay Olshansky of the University of Illinois, one of the authors of a white paper describing the life-expectancy projections. “All of them fall into a category I would call ‘super-agers’.”

Here are some of the federation’s conclusions:

· Trump would have an almost 85 percent probability of surviving a second term. At the time of a second inauguration, he would be 74.7 years old, and could expect to have nearly 11 healthy years ahead of him.

· Biden would have a 79 percent probability of surviving a first term and a 70 percent chance of surviving a second. At the time of a second inauguration, he would be 82 and expected to live another 7 healthy years.

· Sanders would have a 77 percent probability of surviving one term and 67 percent probability of surviving a second. At the time of a second inauguration, he would be 83.4 years old and expected to live another 6.5 healthy years.

The federation made its predictions before Sanders suffered a heart attack last fall. Interestingly, the heart attack doesn’t dramatically change his longevity prospects, according to Olshansky.

While the heart attack could impact his life expectancy, he still has a high probability of making it through two terms, according to Olshansky.

And the fact that he received a stent might actually add to his longevity, he said.

“There are a lot of people who have these stents put in and end up being healthier with the stent than before. People can live very long, active lives after a stent is put in,” Olshansky said.

Interestingly, the candidates’ life expectancies at the time of the first inauguration don’t decrease by four years if they reach a second, as might seem logical. Rather, they decrease by a lesser amount. That’s because each additional year of survival puts them about people who, on average, live longer.

“You get a bonus the longer you live. I call it a survival bonus,” Olshansky said.

The authors concluded: “Chronological age should not be a relevant criterion use to judge presidential candidates.”

They further point out that, in setting the minimum age of 35 for a president, the founding fathers did so with the idea a president requires the experience and wisdom that comes with age, and a person of more advanced age will have a track record enabling voters to better judge their qualifications.

Looking at it that way, the authors write, “one could make the case that the most qualified among the available candidates are older.”