Can Election Trust Be Rebuilt When Losers Refuse to Concede? New Study Offers Hope

The 2020 election left a lasting scar on American democracy. President Trump’s unprecedented refusal to concede and relentless lies about voter fraud drove trust in elections to historic lows. This erosion of confidence threatens the very foundation of our democratic system.

Yet a ray of hope emerges from fresh research by Jennifer Gaudette of UC Riverside, highlighted in a recent Niskanen Center podcast. Gaudette’s study explores whether public information campaigns can restore trust in elections, even in a polarized environment where partisan loyalty often dictates skepticism.

The findings are striking. Using samples from California and Texas—two states on opposite ends of the political spectrum—Gaudette shows that voters’ mistrust of “outpartisan” states stems largely from ignorance about how elections are run. For example, many Americans wrongly assume election machines are connected to the internet and vulnerable to hacking.

When voters are given straightforward facts explaining how elections are secured—such as the offline status of voting machines—they become significantly more trusting of election results, even in states they usually oppose. Democrats in California grew more confident in Texas elections, and Republicans in Texas gained trust in California’s processes. This effect extended across party lines, including Independents.

The research underscores a critical problem: the decentralized nature of U.S. elections means most voters don’t understand how their own elections work, let alone those in other states. This information vacuum allows partisan biases and misinformation to fill the gap, deepening mistrust.

Ironically, the fragmented election system also makes large-scale fraud or manipulation much harder to pull off, as 50 states and thousands of counties independently administer elections. But without transparency and education, voters remain suspicious.

As the 2024 midterms approach, this study offers a practical path forward. Election officials and advocates must prioritize clear, honest communication about election security to rebuild public confidence. Without it, the refusal of losing candidates to concede could continue to undermine democracy.

In a moment when authoritarian tactics threaten our elections, trust is not just a nice-to-have. It is essential. Gaudette’s research reminds us that while lies and denialism can erode trust, truth and transparency can restore it—if we are willing to invest in informing the public.