Why 2026 Election Results May Not Be Decided on Election Night Despite Claims of Fraud

POLICY WIRE — Washington, United States — Control of both the House and the Senate may not be immediately clear once Tuesday night concludes. While some 2026 midterm races will take longer to resolve than others, election experts emphasize that this delay is not unusual and does not indicate fraud, despite some candidate claims.

Experts advise voters to ignore politicians who claim the process is foul while ballots are still being cast and counted. When key races are close, results naturally take more time to emerge as data unfolds.

Becker notes that a significant wave of reporting occurs in these scenarios, and it is almost certain that candidates who believe they are losing will spread disinformation about election integrity to fill the vacuum. He believes President Trump will likely spread similar lies regarding the election night as he did in 2020.

Lawrence Norden, vice president of the Elections and Government Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, expressed concern regarding misinformation that flourishes between voting day and the final results. He suggests this timeframe is extended when a race is tight, noting that the speed of counting does not change the outcome in extremely close contests.

Becker points out that public perception of counting speed is often disconnected from the actual rate of processing. While election officials race to unofficially report as many ballots as possible, the public narrative is largely dictated by when media outlets call elections.

California, the largest state in the nation, is expected to have some races decided quickly while others could take days or even weeks to finalize. William Gates, executive director of Arizona State University’s Mechanics of Democracy, noted that some California contests are called at 8:01 p.m. because a Democratic victory is anticipated, yet these races do not attract much national notice.

Gates added that high-profile primaries, such as the Los Angeles mayor and California governor’s races, required several days to determine winners. A primary reason for this duration is that mail ballots—which can be received up to a week after Election Day if postmarked correctly—require more processing time. In California, every registered voter is eligible to vote by mail.

Mail ballots must undergo signature verification; while those arriving before Election Day can be processed in advance, they cannot be counted until polls close. Those arriving on Election Day or later are processed slower due to this verification requirement.

Gates stated that Arizona does not actually take longer to count votes than other states, but the state is targeted for criticism because its elections are close. He identified Arizona as one of the few remaining swing states, with Maricopa serving as the quintessential swing county.

Becker asserted that it is physically impossible to count every ballot on election night. He noted that election officials have never completed counting on that night because the ballots are too complex, and every state requires weeks for official certification.

Some states take longer than others, particularly those with high volumes of mail-in votes. In Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, counting is further hindered by state laws that prevent officials from even processing mail ballots until the morning of Election Day.

In addition to California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, Utah, Washington, and D. Columbia automatically mail ballots to all active registered voters. The composition of voters among mail-in, early in-person, and Election Day ballots can vary significantly, causing numbers to shift suddenly throughout the night and in the following days.

Norden explained that the votes are already present, they are simply not all counted simultaneously. He used a basketball analogy, stating that watching the count is like watching a recording of a game that has already occurred; the game is over, but the content of the ballots is only revealed over election night.

Norden concluded that knowing the Knicks staged a comeback against the Lakers at the end of a game on a videotape does not mean the team added points after the game had ended.

Reporting by Policy-Wire (PW)