The Quiet Rise of Election Deniers in American Politics

The Growing Influence of Election Denial

When voters head to the polls on November 3, they'll encounter something unprecedented: nearly 200 candidates who have publicly questioned or undermined the legitimacy of elections. These aren't fringe figures—many are running for positions with significant influence over how ballots are counted, verified, and certified in the coming years.

This alarming trend reflects a broader shift in American politics, where distrust of electoral processes has evolved from isolated incidents into a structural challenge to democracy itself. The data, compiled by States United Action, shows that these individuals will hold roles that could determine whether future presidential elections are conducted fairly and transparently.

"All Americans should be concerned if people who are trying to undermine trust in elections and trying to interfere in the election process are taking positions of responsibility over elections," said Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice. "We've seen in recent years an increasing number of election deniers taking some positions of public trust. As the numbers increase, it just increases the risk to our election system. This really is an attempt to corrode the system from within."

From Conspiracy Theories to State Power

The most significant danger isn't just that these candidates will win elections—they're seeking roles that could give them control over how voting is conducted in their states for years to come. In 20 states, there are already 27 election deniers who hold statewide office with oversight responsibilities, such as secretary of state or attorney general.

These positions are critical: they govern the rules around voter registration, vote counting, and even how disputes are resolved in the event of an election challenge. If someone like Jim Marchant—formerly a Nevada state representative who proudly calls himself an election denier—wins the secretary of state race, he could implement sweeping changes to how elections are managed in his state. His platform includes deregistering all voters and switching to hand-counted paper ballots—a move that would not only slow down the process but also create new opportunities for manipulation or error.

Why This Matters Beyond the Midterms

The November elections won't be the last time we see these figures in power. Many of those running are seeking positions that will shape how the 2028 presidential election is conducted. For instance, Tom Tiffany, a former Wisconsin congressman who supported legal challenges to the 2020 results, is now running for governor—a position that would allow him to appoint top election officials and set voting rules for future elections.

In Ohio, billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy, another prominent election denier, has proposed voter suppression measures aimed at making it harder to vote. If he wins as governor, his influence could extend far beyond the state line—potentially affecting federal-level election laws through his ability to shape national policy discourse.

The Role of Trump and His Network

Donald Trump's influence on this movement cannot be overstated. According to States United Action, over 60% of Trump's public statements about elections since the 2024 election include explicit claims of fraud or rigging—a figure that has risen to 84% in the second quarter of 2026.

This sustained narrative of electoral fraud has provided fertile ground for others to adopt similar positions. It's not enough to simply oppose a candidate or disagree with a result; it's become acceptable, even strategic, to claim the entire process was compromised. The result is that we're witnessing a normalization of election denial as a political strategy rather than an aberration.

A Look at Some Key Races

Let's take a closer look at a few races that exemplify this growing trend:

• Michigan Senate Race: Former Congressman Mike Rogers, once critical of Trump's election interference tactics, has shifted his stance and now positions himself as a champion of “election integrity.” He has made it clear that he supports the claims of fraud in Michigan and is using these allegations to build his campaign. Polls show him neck-and-neck with Democratic challenger Abdul El-Sayed.
• Wisconsin Governor Race: Tom Tiffany, who voted against certifying election results in Pennsylvania and Arizona, seeks to become governor—a role that would give him control over the state's election apparatus. Initial polls show a tight race against Democratic opponent David Crowley.
• Ohio Governor Race: Vivek Ramaswamy, known for his conspiracy theories around the 2020 election, is running for governor and has proposed voter suppression laws that could significantly alter how elections are conducted in the state. The race remains extremely close according to polling.
• Nevada Secretary of State: Jim Marchant, a longtime advocate of QAnon theories, is challenging current secretary of state Cisco Aguilar in a rematch of his 2022 loss. His campaign is based on radical proposals such as deregistering every voter and moving to paper ballots. With only $13.86 in campaign funds, Marchant is a long shot—but his platform reflects a deep-seated distrust of digital voting systems.
• Colorado Secretary of State: James Wiley, an avowed election denier, claims the 2020 election was stolen and wants to delete Colorado's voter lists. While illegal under both federal and state law, Wiley's campaign uses tools like ELLY—a system designed to flag voter registration issues—to support his claims. His opponent, Amanda Gonzalez, is a former clerk and head of Common Cause Colorado.

What This Means for the Future

The presence of so many election deniers in key political positions raises serious concerns about the integrity of the electoral process moving forward. These candidates are not just opposing policies—they're challenging the fundamental legitimacy of how votes are cast and counted.

This isn't just about politics; it's about preserving democratic norms. As more Americans lose faith in institutions, we risk creating a feedback loop where distrust breeds further disenfranchisement, which leads to even greater skepticism. And when election officials themselves are distrustful of the process they're supposed to protect, we have a genuine crisis on our hands.

The challenge for voters, elected officials, and civic organizations alike is clear: we must ensure that trust in the electoral system isn't just maintained but strengthened. The November elections will be a test of whether this trend can continue unchecked—and whether we're prepared to defend democratic norms when they're under attack.