As the 2026 midterms approach, an important issue is unfolding behind the scenes. In 23 states, including key swing states, candidates who question the legitimacy of recent elections are competing for offices that will play significant roles in certifying future elections.
According to a recent analysis by States United Action, more than 50 election-denying candidates are running for crucial positions like governor and secretary of state. These positions often control the election process, either by overseeing administration or certifying results.
Joanna Lydgate, the CEO of States United, emphasizes the need for voters to understand where these candidates stand. “We want voters to have accurate information and recognize candidates who uphold the values of free and fair elections,” she states.
This year, 39 states have elections for offices directly involved in election oversight. The scrutiny is particularly intense given the lessons learned from the turbulent 2020 election. For instance, Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State, rejected a request to alter results. In Michigan, Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, faced threats from armed protesters regarding election outcomes.
Despite past setbacks, this election cycle has fewer election deniers than in recent years. Lydgate attributes this shift to candidates realizing that denying election results can alienate voters. Reports indicate a consistent pattern: candidates who question election legitimacy often struggle in competitive races. In fact, an analysis following the 2022 midterms revealed that Republican candidates who denied the 2020 election results lagged behind their peers by approximately 3 percentage points.
Interestingly, research from the Campaign Legal Center highlights that, while election denial remains a fringe view within the general population, it has gained traction in certain political circles. Brendan Fischer, who leads research in this area, notes the emergence of a robust “election denial infrastructure.” This network effectively encourages candidates to adopt misleading narratives regarding elections.
Looking ahead to 2028, the implications of the current election landscape could be significant. With candidates pushing agendas to alter voter perception, the choices made in the upcoming midterms may shape the political future of the country.
As we navigate these complex political waters, keeping track of who stands for free and fair elections will be crucial. Only through informed voting can we ensure that the integrity of the electoral process is upheld.
