During normal times, the president of the United States would not routinely claim, without evidence, an epidemic of “voter fraud.” But Donald Trump is on another tirade about supposed fraud — this time in California’s primary elections. If there’s any good news, though, the publicity and pushback against his claims will inoculate the public against similar unsupported charges in November’s midterms, if control of Congress depends upon late-arriving results in the Golden State.
Let’s begin with some obvious points. California’s vote-counting process is notoriously slow. Millions of the state’s voters choose to vote by mail, and election officials’ efforts to confirm that voters have followed all the rules take some time. The state has unusually lenient rules for both the receipt of mail-in ballots (timely postmarked ballots may be counted if election officials receive them within seven days of the election) and for curing defective ballots (such as mail ballots on which a voter forgets to add their signature). Despite the popularity of mail-in ballots, the state has not prioritized saving state resources over a quicker vote count.
Further, it is rather routine that California results show Republican and more conservative candidates doing well in initial tallies, only for Democrats and liberal candidates to appear to “gain” as more ballots are tallied. Voters who have lived in the same place longer, own a home, are white and are wealthier are all more likely to receive and send back their ballots early — and they are also more likely to vote Republican.
President Trump has incessantly fueled beliefs on the right that voter fraud is prevalent in Democratic states.
Think about election tallying this way. You have to be away from your television during the Super Bowl and so you record the game. When you watch it the next day — having avoided hearing the result in between — the game is already over. The winner was the same before you watched and after. It is the same with California’s election ballots: All the ballots were cast by Election Day, the election is over, and we just must wait to learn the final results.
The issue of late-voting Democrats was especially pronounced in last week’s elections. In the Los Angeles mayoral race, polls show many voters undecided between unpopular incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, reality TV star Spencer Pratt (running to her right) and Los Angeles City Council member Nithya Raman (running to Bass’ left). Bass made it to the runoff, and the first vote totals showed Pratt in second. But late Monday, with 93% of the ballots counted the Associated Press projected that Raman will join Bass in this fall’s general election.
In the state’s gubernatorial primary, the initial results placed Republican Steve Hilton in first, ahead of Democrats Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer. As more ballots were processed, Becerra moved into first late Friday. Hilton is still likely to finish in the top two and advance to the general election, but Steyer has not yet been ruled out given the number of outstanding ballots.
This “blue shift” would not be a problem if we lived in normal times. If we have to wait a week or two to find out which candidates will face Bass and Becerra, that’s plenty of time to prepare for November. Unfortunately, President Trump has incessantly fueled beliefs on the right that voter fraud is prevalent in Democratic states, and in particular that California’s slow vote count shows that the system is “crooked.” He did it again last week. It undermines voters’ confidence in our elections’ integrity for no good reason.
And he’s not alone. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson told reporters the “efforts are so diabolical and so far upstream it’s impossible to prove. But I think everybody knows instinctively that something is wrong here.” Yes, the alleged voter fraud claimed by Trump and his allies is always the perfect crime: happening on a massive scale yet impossible to detect. It’s quite convenient to have a theory that is completely unfalsifiable.
Some supporters of Pratt have made similar charges without evidence or simply “asked questions” about potential fraud. They only embarrass themselves by showing that either they don’t understand how California’s process works or they are cynical enough to think the public will accept false claims.
Even now, there is much to worry about regarding November’s elections.
If the race for control of the House of Representatives is close in November, the balance of power could well come down to races in California. Media reports on early returns will show Republican candidates “in the lead” but Democrats “gaining” as more votes are counted. Should that come to pass, I fully expect that Trump and his supporters will again cry fraud and try to delegitimize any Democratic victories and the integrity of the election process.
Even now, there is much to worry about regarding November’s elections. Trump’s U.S. attorney in Los Angeles, Bill Essayli, said he is investigating potential fraud in California’s primaries based upon no evidence. This follows the administration’s ongoing probes related to the 2020 election — efforts that could be a test run for the midterms.
The administration is trying to assemble a national citizen database and attempting to forbid the the U.S. Postal Service from returning mailed ballots from voters who are not on approved lists, a matter now being litigated in courts. Both federal law enforcement and cybersecurity officials have reportedly canceled efforts to help state and local election officials secure the 2026 elections.
But Trump has shown his hand and he’s come up short. It is hard to overstate the importance of the exchange on Sunday between Trump and NBC News’ “Meet the Press” anchor Kristen Welker. Speaking about California’s elections, Trump said, “They’re crooked just like you’re crooked, your press is crooked. And ‘Meet the Press’ is crooked.” As Welker pushed him repeatedly for evidence, Trump could only repeat his entirely unsupported charges: “There’s tremendous evidence. There’s nothing but evidence.” In the end, he stormed out.
In the long term, California should still do what it can to speed up the vote count; that would help maintain confidence in elections. With enough resources thrown at the problem and commands from the Legislature, election officials can improve their ballot processing time. But serious progress is unlikely before November.
For this year, election officials, the media and even the public all play roles in assuring voters about the fairness and integrity of the process. California election officials have been quite transparent about their processes all along the way, and that should continue. Media outlets should stop reporting which candidate is “in the lead.” This is not an ongoing election; the election is over, and the results are simply “too early to call.”
In response to charges of “voter fraud,” ordinary people can share media, such as the two-minute exchange between Trump and Welker, which show the emptiness of the president’s claims.
Rumormongering about California was always likely to be central to the president’s attempts to weaken faith in this year’s elections. But thanks to Trump himself, anyone paying any attention knows that California’s vote count is notoriously slow, that the “blue shift” favoring Democrats routinely happens and that Trump has produced no evidence to support his claims. The boy has cried wolf too many times, and if he tries this again in November, the appropriate response should be repudiation, not panic.
Richard L. Hasen
Richard L. Hasen is professor at UCLA School of Law, where he directs its Safeguarding Democracy Project.