Bad Politics, Bad Policies: Election Denial in 2023

A review of Election Deniers’ actions after their first 100 days in office reveals new anti-democracy trends in the states post-2022 elections. However, one significant trend from the midterms remains critical: most voters did not trust Election Deniers with their votes. 

States United found that in 2022, Election Denier candidates who ran for statewide office paid a penalty at the ballot box for their embrace of election lies. Our research shows that in races for state offices that oversee voting, Election Denier candidates received 2.3 to 3.7 percentage points less of the vote than expected, compared with similar candidates in similar races.  

Think of it as an Election Denier penalty. Voters rejected candidates specifically because those candidates refused to support free and fair elections. It was enough to flip five to seven races away from Election Deniers and to their opponents. We also find that at least one Republican candidate who was not an Election Denier won their race because they did not embrace election lies, and therefore did not suffer the same penalty.  

Our research also shows that Election Deniers did not have a direct effect on voter turnout in these races, suggesting that the Election Denier penalty was largely driven by vote-switching. Voters who otherwise would have voted for the Republican candidate instead voted for the Democrat when the Republican was an Election Denier. (Note: In 2022, Election Denier statewide candidates were all running on the Republican ticket; not all Republicans running were Election Deniers.)   

These findings square with polling that States United conducted just before the election in key states. A plurality of voters (43 percent) across Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin reported that they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who believed the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump. That was also true of the voters who often swing elections—independents and those who don’t vote every cycle. The more voters learned about Election Deniers, the less popular they were. And voters said that they were particularly concerned about certain Election Denier behavior, specifically if a candidate participated in the January 6 insurrection, encouraged people to threaten election officials, or spread conspiracy theories about our election system. 

In all, 23 Election Deniers now hold office in 17 states—7 governors, 5 secretaries of state, and 11 attorneys general. As these officials pass the 100-day mark of their current terms, some discouraging themes are emerging about their past and current priorities for election administration. 

Some Election Deniers, citing disinformation and conspiracy theories, are withdrawing their states from the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a widely praised, nonpartisan membership organization of state election officials that bolsters election security by helping maintain accurate and up-to-date voter rolls for member states. Bipartisan current and former election officials have expressed concern that these withdrawals will leave elections less secure. 

Election Denier officials are also moving to restrict resources and funding support to local election administrators, further hampering state and local offices that are already underfunded. Other officials are creating or expanding special units to investigate and prosecute election crimes — again while pushing claims of widespread voter fraud.  

Election Deniers who won their races for statewide office are: 

At least 141 Election Deniers entered races last year for governor, attorney general, or secretary of state. All but 15 lost. Many of these failed candidates, however, are finding ways to continue influencing our elections and keep election denial front and center. By seeking control of state parties, raising large amounts of money off election lies, and exploring future runs for office, these Election Deniers continue to threaten our democracy from outside the halls of government. 

Election Deniers who lost their races for statewide office are: 

For the majority of Election Denier candidates, lying about our elections wasn’t just bad for democracy, it was bad for them politically. Voters imposed a clear cost for election lies in statewide races where these candidates were running to oversee elections. As a result, voters in what were some of the most closely contested states in the 2020 presidential election cycle refused to give the keys to their elections over to those who threatened to undermine their votes.  

However, Election Deniers are clearly not stopping or slowing down post-2022 losses. Election Denial continues to shape our election landscape in dangerous ways, from both inside and outside of elected office.