Politics

Poll: Americans disagree on what a ‘stolen’ election means

Published

5 months ago

May 10, 2026

Questions about the integrity of elections have become pervasive in American politics — and new polling reveals the sharp differences in Republican and Democratic fears.

Nearly six years after President Donald Trump and his allies sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election, a recent POLITICO Poll suggests that a notable number of Americans are distrustful of the system heading into November. More than one-third say it is likely the 2026 midterms will be “stolen,” and one in four say they don’t expect the elections to be fair.

But both parties clash strongly over what they believe are the core problems with U.S. elections, complicating any path to restoring voter trust.

Democrats are concerned about voter intimidation and suppression, with 58 percent of those who voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris worried that eligible Americans will be prevented from voting, the survey finds. Meanwhile, Republicans remain focused on the possibility of fraud, with 52 percent of Trump voters saying they are concerned that some ineligible people will be allowed to vote.

The Blue Light News Poll asked respondents about 11 common election concerns, ranging from partisan gerrymandering to impounding ballots, and whether people saw them as legitimate parts of the process or a way to rig elections. Of those, Democrats and Republicans had meaningful disagreement or lacked consensus on six.

Take expanding mail-in voting, for example. Once considered a largely routine way to broaden access to voting, a majority of Trump voters now say this can be a way to rig elections. Harris voters feel the opposite: 59 percent say expanding mail-in voting is a normally fair or always fair part of the electoral system.

Then there’s deploying ICE at polling locations. A majority of Harris voters say the practice would more likely be a way to sway election results, even as some Republicans haven’t ruled out such a measure to strengthen election security. A 47 percent plurality of Trump voters say deploying ICE across polling stations would be normally fair or always fair.

The poll results reveal a striking truth as lawmakers continue to battle over election security: Even as a sizable share of Americans believe elections can, or will, be “stolen,” there’s very little agreement on what that even means.

“I don’t think that we have a great working definition of what constitutes … a free and fair election,” said Stephen Richer, a legal fellow at the Cato Institute and former Republican county recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona. “I think it is entirely possible that even within the world that doesn’t think that elections are being hacked by Italian spy satellites, that we have a disagreement as to whether or not we’ve had a free and fair election in 2026.”

Trump often claims the 2020 results were “stolen” and blames mail voting, the lack of strict voter ID and proof of citizenship laws for opening the door to voter fraud — though courts and election officials have repeatedly upheld the legitimacy of those results. Many Democrats, on the other hand, are already bracing for Trump to interfere with the election and strategizing about ways to respond.

“President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered non-citizen voters,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.

Doubt about election proceedings has still not overtaken the electorate — nearly half of Americans say they still expect the 2026 midterms to be fair. But the survey — along with interviews with election experts — underscores how rhetoric from leaders is trickling down to voters.

David Becker, the executive director and founder of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the divergence results partly from the strict echo chambers within the Democratic and Republican parties.

“This goes back to the problem where many of us are retreating into our media bubbles, where we hear a reality that only serves to validate our existing opinions,” he said.

For Democrats, their doubts appear to be going up as Trump continues to repeat false claims about the 2020 election and raise alarms about the 2026 midterms.

Nearly 40 percent of Harris voters say it is likely the 2026 midterms will be “stolen,” compared to 16 percent who believed the 2020 election was stolen — though comparing perspectives on a past election to a future one is not an exact measure. That’s roughly the same level as Trump voters who doubt the integrity of the 2020 results or who fear the 2026 midterms will be stolen — both at around 40 percent — according to the poll results.

The survey finds that some of the most significant areas of disagreement or distance between the parties are the prospect of ICE showing up at polls, mail-in voting, and requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote.

Roughly 60 percent of Harris voters say ICE showing up at polling places would normally or always be a way to steal elections, compared to 33 percent of Trump voters who say the same.

The Trump administration has insisted that immigration officers will not be at polling places in November, but many Democrats have still expressed concern over the possibility. In March, nine state secretaries of state wrote a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin seeking confirmation that immigration agents would not be present at polling locations in November.

“If you have ICE outside of a handful of voting locations, I think that there are some on the left of the pro-democracy coalition, or the previously existing pro-democracy coalition, who would say that it invalidates the fairness of an election,” Richer said. “And then there are those of us who would say … it’s not ideal, and there are legal remedies, but that doesn’t mean that the election was stolen or should be thrown out.”

The 2020 election marked a major turning point in rhetoric surrounding mail-in voting, when Trump repeatedly criticized the practice during the COVID-19 pandemic — allegations he has continued to press in the years since.

Roughly 55 percent of Harris voters say banning mail-in voting could lead to a rigged election, while Trump voters are split on the issue: 41 percent say banning mail-in voting would largely be fair, while 42 percent say this would be a way to steal an election.

And then there’s the question of voter registration, and whether to require proof of citizenship when voters register — a core objective of Trump’s SAVE America Act. Just under two-thirds of Trump voters say this would always or normally be a fair part of the election process. A plurality of Harris voters agree, but by a much smaller margin: 44 percent say this would be a fair election practice.

Even the idea of voter roll maintenance — a common part of election administration that Trump’s Justice Department has intensified by aiming to strip non-citizens from every state’s rolls — shows a partisan gap. Roughly 60 percent of Harris voters say the practice of “purging voter rolls” is normally or always a way to steal an election, compared to just 46 percent of Trump voters.

There are areas where the parties agree. Pluralities or majorities of both groups agree that same-day voter registration and signing up new voters outside of churches are largely fair.

Majorities of both Trump and Harris voters say partisan gerrymandering can be a way to steal elections, which comes as officials in both parties engage in an intensifying redistricting arms race. There is also a near-majority consensus that seizing or impounding ballots can be a way to rig results. Earlier this year, the FBIseized 2020 election ballots from the Fulton County elections office in Georgia, and a federal judge recently ruled that the Justice Department can keep the election records as part of its search.

Still, election experts say the overall partisan divide is dampening voters’ confidence.

“We’ve now had multiple years in a row of state legislators passing and introducing and passing laws that are targeting voter access — making it harder to participate in the electoral process — where the actual mechanics of elections have been politicized, and that too takes its toll,” said Wendy Weiser, the Brennan Center for Justice’s vice president for democracy.

Politics

The GOP has a midterm messaging problem. Ramaswamy isn’t helping

Published

6 hours ago

October 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The GOP has a midterm messaging problem. Ramaswamy isn’t helping

lead image

Politics

Why Republicans’ massive cash advantage is evaporating on the airwaves

Published

7 hours ago

October 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Republicans are banking on a massive cash edge to help save their majority in Congress. But they are losing much of that advantage in an important arena: broadcast TV ads.

Republicans have spent $677 million on those ads across 10 key Senate battleground states, compared to $479 million by the Democrats. But the GOP’s money isn’t going nearly as far because they’re more dependent on outside groups that pay much higher rates than candidates.

The disparity has helped Democrats stay in the fight for Senate control amid an onslaught of GOP outside spending.

In Ohio’s Senate race, Republican groups make up 63% of the $218 million spent. But in spite of their nearly two-to-one spending advantage, they make up just over half of ads that are on the airwaves, according to data from the tracking service AdImpact. In Texas, Republicans have outspent Democrats by a three-to-one margin, but have aired just 58% of the ads. And in Michigan, the GOP accounts for 60% of the spending but just over half of the ads.

A large part of this discrepancy comes down to the mechanics of broadcast advertising. Candidates, and now political parties thanks to a recent Supreme Court ruling, are entitled to significantly lower rates. That has allowed Democratic candidates — who have posted bonkers fundraising hauls — to offset much of the GOP advantage in super PACs. Republican Senate candidates, on the other hand, struggled overall with their fundraising. And some GOP outside groups bought their ad time later, when it was even more expensive.

“There are limitations to the impact of ‘big money’ in politics,” said Sean Cooksey, a Republican former FEC commissioner. “It’s a good demonstration of the economics of campaign fundraising. Hard dollars really just go so much further.”

The disparity also shows “the Republican overreliance on outside groups,” said Ian Russell, a Democratic admaker.

“You get an eye-popping dollar amount, but it doesn’t actually translate into as many spots as you would think relative to a well-financed candidate,” Russell said. “[Republicans] were just hoping that they could spend their way out of everything that was going wrong for them. But the problem is, their issues run much deeper than a few ad buys can fix. Especially when you’ve got monster fundraising hauls from the Democratic side.”

Republicans in House and Senate races have long been more dependent on outside groups and megadonors, and for multiple cycles have seen their cash advantage undercut by fundraising strength from individual Democratic candidates. But that trend is particularly pronounced this year given the combination of Republican super PAC money and their candidates’ struggles.

In 2024, Republican outside groups spent only about 15% more than Democrats on TV ads across House and Senate general election contests, according to a Blue Light News analysis of AdImpact data. This cycle, GOP outside groups have spent 7% more.

In a few states, the discrepancy between dollars and airtime is less stark. Republicans account for 60% of the spending in Maine’s Senate race and an equal percentage of the ads, according to AdImpact. That’s in part because Sen. Susan Collins has outraised her Democratic opponent Troy Jackson over the whole cycle, although Jackson, who didn’t launch his campaign until July, raised far more in the third quarter.

The numbers show the shifting dynamics of campaign strategy after the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to more spending from parties by granting them the lower advertising rate.

Republicans have been faster to take advantage of the new rules: Major coordinated spending efforts from the NRSC and RNC have helped their side significantly this cycle.

Republicans have far outspent Democrats on Senate party-coordinated Senate advertising, $90 million to $34.6 million across TV, radio and digital ads, according to data from AdImpact.

“If I were the leader of either party, I would say you shouldn’t give a dollar, you shouldn’t give a single penny to these super PACs until you’ve maxed out to the party committee,” Cooksey said.

Some Republicans say that strategic errors have contributed to erasing their cash edge. A number of GOP strategists have also privately griped that MAGA Inc. — one of the major outside groups backing their candidates — bought TV airtime too late, forcing them to pay even higher rates and further draining resources and increasing the price of reaching voters. Republicans fretted for months about whether Trump’s well-financed super PAC, MAGA Inc., would get involved. The group has since spent heavily, but only launched its first general election ad buys in September.

“There is no question MAGA Inc. should have bought ads earlier in the cycle,” said one national GOP operative who was granted anonymity to discuss party strategy, noting that rates across the country increase as Election Day nears. Other top GOP outside groups, like the Senate Leadership Fund and the Congressional Leadership Fund, made their early advertising reservations much earlier in the cycle than MAGA Inc.

Trump allies waved away that criticism. A person familiar with the Trump operation’s midterm planning, granted anonymity to discuss strategy, said it’s “indisputable that the spending from the Trump political effort has kept us competitive in many Senate races.”

MAGA Inc. declined to comment.

Still, GOP outside groups are utilizing their cash advantage in some underappreciated ways.

Republican super PACs have massively outspent their Democratic counterparts on mail — roughly $157 million to $35 million for the general election — according to a Blue Light News analysis of independent expenditure filings submitted to the Federal Election Commission. That’s led by a whopping $44 million in spending on mail across 24 races from the Trump-aligned No Going Back PAC, along with $23.8 million across 20 races from Elon Musk’s America PAC.

GOP-aligned super PACs have also spent more than Democratic ones on phone calls and text messages, the data shows.

Politics

Rick Jackson is Georgia Republicans’ best hope. Donald Trump may get in the way.

Published

7 hours ago

October 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Georgia Republicans are counting on Rick Jackson to save them from a wipeout in November — if President Donald Trump doesn’t get in the way.

The billionaire health care executive and political newcomer has spent nearly $200 million since he entered the Georgia governor’s race earlier this year. That’s boosted GOP hopes as many in the party have all but given up on the state’s marquee Senate race, where Rep. Mike Collins is struggling to close the gap against a formidably well-funded Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff. Republicans worry that their open contests for attorney general and lieutenant governor as well as control of the state general assembly could be in peril in a larger blue wave.

But Jackson’s deep pockets are being tested against a difficult political environment for Republicans, weighed down by unpopular Trump actions, including the war in Iran. And some in the GOP worry that the president’s repeated visits to Georgia could only make the situation worse.

“I don’t know that Trump coming helps Republicans more so than it excites Democrats, especially in a wave election year, and so becomes and becomes a catch-22 for Republican candidates,” said Jason Shepherd, a former Cobb County chair who is supporting Jackson.

One Georgia-based Republican strategist who is not involved in the gubernatorial race posited that Trump’s dual appearances in the state almost certainly did more harm than help. They, like others in this article, were granted anonymity to speak openly about the race to avoid reprisals.

“Every piece of data that I’ve seen, it is not MAGA Republicans that are unmotivated to vote in this election,” the person said. “All the data that I’ve seen is that the undecideds in our marquee races, and specifically in the governor’s race, have a very, very negative opinion of the president. So, I can’t really rationalize a case for how it would be helpful.”

Jackson, for his part, has carefully navigated his relationship with the president, and has not publicly broken with him on policy like other battleground Republicans. But he has not mentioned the president in any of the nearly 150 ads he’s run in the general election, according to an analysis of data from tracking firm AdImpact. Shortly after the RNC announced that Trump would return to the state this weekend, Jackson’s team said in a statement that the candidate will be campaigning in a different part of Georgia.

And during his only televised gubernatorial debate on Oct. 6 against Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms, Jackson never name-dropped the president — despite his opponent invoking Trump’s name eight times. Instead, the Republican mentioned popular outgoing GOP Gov. Brian Kemp five times and focused on Bottoms’ tenure as mayor of Atlanta during the COVID pandemic.

“It’s been proven time and again that when the message is on Georgia, and the results under Brian Kemp and the conservative vision and roadmap that’s been laid out here, that we win in Georgia. When the focus is on D.C. and personal politics, we lose,” said Cole Muzio, president of the conservative Frontline Policy Action group.

The Jackson campaign declined to comment for this story.

“President Trump is the unequivocal leader, best messenger, and unmatched motivator for the Republican Party,” White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said in a statement.

Natalie Baldassarre, a spokesperson for the Republican National Committee, said in a statement that Republicans “are laser focused on winning, and our candidates will run the races necessary to best represent their districts and prevent Democrats from taking control.”

Jackson is one of several Republicans across the country who now must balance between keeping the president close enough to turn out Republican base voters, but not so closely as to alienate the center.

Though many Georgia Republicans see Jackson as their de-facto ticket-topper, they don’t see his win as a guarantee against Bottoms, the former Atlanta mayor, in a finicky battleground state like Georgia. Jackson has outspent Bottoms nearly five-to-one in the final stretch of the race, but still remains in a close race in public polling.

And yet, without him, Republicans fear the bottom would have already fallen out on races up and down the ballot, given how poorly Collins is performing in polls against Ossoff. Republicans’ top Senate super PAC, Senate Leadership Fund, was dark in Georgia last week, a sign the race may be slipping out of reach.

“If Rick Jackson weren’t running, we would all be in a lot of trouble,” said Stephen Lawson, a Georgia-based Republican strategist and Jackson ally. “He’s our best hope at keeping the state red.”

A second Georgia-based Republican strategist, who is working on other races in the state, underscored how Jackson’s money is keeping the party afloat. “There is no question in my mind that without the extra $150 million he spent in his general election, that the ticket would be lost,” this person said. “That is the only reason there’s still a fight to be had.”

But, this person cautioned, the race is still very much a toss-up, and Jackson’s victory will rely on a large share of Georgia voters choosing to split their ballots between Ossoff for Senate and Jackson for governor.

Jackson’s allies are optimistic that a significant number of voters will do just that. A private statewide poll reviewed by Blue Light News found that roughly 19% of Georgia voters say they are definitely or likely to cast a vote for at least one Democrat and one Republican — a potentially significant pool of crossover voters that could power two very different results in the marquee contests.

Whether the sheer force of Jackson’s spending will prove successful enough to overcome Trump is a microcosm of the larger issue his party is experiencing across the country: National Republicans, flush with cash, hold an enormous financial advantage over Democrats. But money alone may not be enough to insulate candidates in battlegrounds or even in traditionally red territory.

“I don’t know that Republicans across the country should feel as bullish about the cash influx that we’ve gotten because it didn’t work here,” said the first GOP operative. “In terms of actively moving races in our favor, it at least didn’t work here.”

In the last month, as Bottoms began to spend more heavily on the air amid Jackson’s spending advantage, her campaign has noted that polling has started to move marginally in her favor — even if the race remains largely within the margin of error. Her high name ID, as well as cash spent after the primary to define her early, are helping.

“Rick Jackson has spent $200 million in this campaign but all the money in the world can’t hide the fact that he would be a lackey for Donald Trump,” TaNisha Cameron, a spokesperson for Bottoms, said in a statement. “Despite being outspent, Keisha’s message is breaking through and she has the momentum in this race right when it matters.”

Jackson is making more of an effort to tie himself closely to Kemp, who won over moderates and independents in his 2022 reelection for governor and has an approval rating that sits 30 points higher than the president’s in Georgia, according to a recent poll by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Kemp, for his part, has continued to be a presence on the trail for Jackson, including joining him on a statewide tour earlier this month and appearing in at least three TV ads for the campaign.

But Jackson’s pathway to victory requires him to not only secure crossover voters that may support Ossoff in the Senate race or the type of voters who broke for Kemp, but also turn out the MAGA base who powered the president’s two presidential victories in the perennial battleground.

The president is intent on still showing up for him.

Shortly after Jackson dispatched Trump’s initially preferred candidate, Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, in June’s primary runoff, the president was quick to praise Jackson as standing “strong with ‘TRUMP.’” And in subsequent posts on Truth Social, Trump has called the health care executive a “good friend.”

Trump, onstage on Friday, called Jackson a “great businessman,” before adding: “I’ve been watching you, you are good, and he never did this before. Hedid it because he wants to straighten out things and he’s an amazing, an amazing story.”

Aaron Pellish contributed reporting.