Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What were the key claims of fraud in the 2024 U.S. presidential election and who made them?
Executive summary
Claims of fraud around the 2024 U.S. presidential election centered on vote counting (including "vote‑counting computers"), mail‑in ballots, voting machines, noncitizen voting, and alleged misconduct by election workers — many of those themes were repeated online and by prominent Republicans, and fact‑checkers and reporting described many as baseless or unproven [1] [2]. Local officials did refer a small number of suspected fraud or irregularity cases to prosecutors in Wisconsin — 46 instances tied to the Nov. 2024 contest out of more than 3.4 million ballots cast — but reporting frames those referrals as a tiny fraction of total votes [3].
1. Who made the biggest fraud claims — national players and patterns
Major claims were advanced publicly by former President Donald Trump and a range of Republican allies and politicians who had earlier disputed the 2020 result; reporting and synthesis of Republican activity in 2024 note repeated suggestions about vote counting and election procedures from Trump and other GOP figures, and that many Republicans declined to commit to accepting results without qualification [1]. Independent observers and fact‑checkers characterized some high‑profile comments — such as Trump’s references to "vote‑counting computers" — as spawning conspiracy talk that fact‑checkers (PolitiFact and NewsGuard) denied were evidence of fraud [1].
2. What were the main types of fraud alleged
Journalistic and fact‑checking reviews catalogued recurring themes: contested vote counting processes and machines, worries about mail‑in ballots and early voting, claims about noncitizens voting, and allegations that election workers committed fraud — themes that also proliferated on social platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Threads and X [2]. Academic and analytical pieces note continuity with post‑2020 narratives: many Americans were primed to suspect fraud because of earlier disputed claims [4].
3. The scale of documented irregularities vs. online claims
Reporting on concrete referrals shows a very small number of flagged incidents relative to ballots cast: Wisconsin clerks referred 46 instances tied to the Nov. 2024 presidential election to prosecutors out of more than 3.4 million ballots, and 127 cases across several elections were referred in the broader reporting period — figures journalists present as a tiny fraction of total voting [3]. That contrast — few formal referrals versus broad online claims — is a recurring frame in the coverage [3] [2].
4. How fact‑checkers and media assessed the claims
PolitiFact and NewsGuard are cited as denying that some prominent assertions (for example, the "vote‑counting computers" implication) constituted evidence of fraud, and wider media coverage described some reactions as conspiracy theories rather than substantiated findings [1]. Poynter’s fact‑checking overview listed most 2024 claims as focusing on counting, mail ballots, and machines, and highlighted how false claims about noncitizen voting and fraud by election workers circulated widely on social platforms [2].
5. Local investigations and referrals: what they mean and what they don’t
Local election officials do investigate and refer suspicious incidents; Wisconsin’s report that 46 instances related to the presidential contest were sent to prosecutors is an example of routine referral and enforcement work, not proof of systemic fraud, and the coverage stresses that these are a very small portion of votes cast [3]. Available sources do not mention that those referrals resulted in wide prosecutions overturning results; reporting frames them as part of normal post‑election oversight [3].
6. Broader context: political motives and the persistence of narratives
Analysts and reporting place 2024 claims in a broader lineage that began in 2020: narratives that elections are "stolen" can be durable, shape public opinion, and are amplified by political actors and social platforms — scholars and fact‑checking outlets document continuity in public beliefs about fraud and the media ecosystems that spread them [4] [2]. The Wikipedia synthesis of Republican efforts notes organized legal and political moves contesting election administration, and also that fact‑checkers pushed back on specific technical claims [1].
7. What’s left uncertain or not covered here
Available sources do not mention comprehensive nationwide findings that support a systemic fraud claim overturning results in 2024; they do show a combination of high‑profile assertions by national political figures, extensive online misinformation, and a small number of local referrals [1] [3] [2]. Where sources explicitly refute particular interpretations (for example, fact‑checker denials of the "vote‑counting computers" implication), I note those refutations [1].
Bottom line: the public record assembled by journalists, fact‑checkers and election officials in these sources shows that high‑profile allegations were advanced by national Republican figures and amplified online, fact‑checkers challenged key technical claims, and documented referrals of suspected irregularities exist but are numerically tiny compared with millions of ballots cast [1] [2] [3].