(POLL) Election cheating remains top concern

Two-thirds of voters say they are worried that cheating could affect this year’s election, and many of them still say they don’t trust electronic voting machines. 

That’s according to Rasmussen Reports.

The survey found that 66% of likely voters say they are concerned that the outcome of the presidential election will be affected by cheating, including 40% who say they are “very concerned.”

Thirty-one percent (31%) say they aren’t concerned, including 14% who say they are “not at all concerned” about cheating in the election.

These findings have barely changed from a year ago. 

Belief that electronic voting machines may be vulnerable to online hacking has been the subject of coverage by the New York Times, NBC NewsNational Public Radio and other news organizations and it remains widespread.

Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say they think it’s likely that many electronic voting machines are connected to the Internet during elections, including 21% who say they consider it “very likely.”

Thirty-five percent (35%) said they don’t believe it’s likely voting machines are connected to the Internet during elections, including 23% who said it’s “not at all likely.”

Another 20% said they are not sure.

To see survey question wording, click here.

Visit The Sharyl Attkisson Store today

Shop Now

Unique gifts for independent thinkers

Proceeds benefit independent journalism

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

6 thoughts on “(POLL) Election cheating remains top concern”

  1. Fake reporting on FAKE polls goes hand in hand with election cheating, and Fox “News” has already reported that Fake President Joetard has suddenly taken a lead over Trump with Independent voters, miraculously gaining 14% to leap from a 12% deficit to a 2% lead:

    “Biden overcame a 12-percentage point deficit among independents and now leads Trump 50%-48% with the group compared to a previous NPR/PBS News/ Marist poll taken in May.”

    So anti-Trump Fox “News” is at it again, same as in the 2020 election with the fake “debate” where Chris Wallace defended Joetard and argued with Trump on Joetard’s behalf, and then called the crooked election in Arizona early.

    Fox “News” might — keyword “might” — report other news fairly, but nobody should trust Fox when in comes to election information. They recently had Fox Corp board member RINO Paul Ryan on AGAIN purely to bash Trump, and they carefully craft stories and “analysis” to suit their anti-Trump agenda The closer election day comes, the more untrustworthy Fox “News” gets.

  2. The burden on proving any election is honest is on the government. Otherwise, there isn’t the necessary predicate for the peaceful transfer of power.

    The 2020 election was stolen by Democrats even more blatantly than 1960 when Daley stole Illinois (see Kennedy’s cousin’s book) and LBJ stole Texas (the same way he stole his senate seat in 1948. see vol 3 Caro bio).

    The 2000 election saw Gore’s lawyers instruct election commissions in Democrat counties in Fla to throw out legitimate military ballots despite a Federal Court injunction requiring them to be counted. Does anyone still believe that the network calls for Gore while polls were open in the panhandle was inadvertent? It cost Bush thousands of votes. Anyone still think using the left-wing exit pollsters was not deliberate? Remember that 24 of the 25 Fla counties with the most spoiled ballots were Dem run. That’s a huge red flag of shenanigans.

    Democrats have a long, sordid history of election fraud. No reason for anyone to give them the benefit of the doubt or an assumption of legality. They haven’t earned it.

  3. If ‘rigged elections’ is not on the minds of a vast majority of native born Americans, we are in deep doo-doo.

  4. Jeffery Wayne Tartt

    Cheating will affect this year’s election. Anyone who believes elections are secure here in America are not only wrong but uneducated in our election process. Election integrity is just ANOTHER lie we have to endure as law abiding citizens. Just think folks what kind of country we would have if Congress would make it illegal for those with power over us to be truthful and honest or lose that aforementioned power. It will NEVER happen. That’s our country.

  5. “The burden on proving any election is honest is on the government.”
    There are several things wrong with this statement. First of all, there is no way to “prove” that any election was honest. It can’t be done. If you choose not to believe them, they can’t prove you’re wrong. It’s up to the government to explain what they did to prevent fraud and investigate possible fraud claims. That’s it.
    Stealing an election is a crime. And if the government accuses someone of a crime, the defendant doesn’t have to prove anything. The government has to prove that the defendant committed the crime. So if you, or anyone else, want to claim that the election was stolen, then it’s up to you to bring evidence and convince an impartial judicial system that you’re right. That’s just the way it works. And so far that hasn’t happened.
    And the whole burden isn’t on the government. It’s also on each of us to evaluate the fraud claims after they have been investigated and be willing to admit if they didn’t pan out. Because let’s not pretend that the government didn’t provide lots of evidence that the election wasn’t stolen. They responded to the various allegations of fraud by conducting recounts and deep dives and other investigations that showed that no significant fraud occurred. Case in point: Voting machines were accused of changing votes from Trump to Biden. So Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin conducted hand recounts of the ballots that did two things: (1) it took the machines completely out of the picture, and (2) it showed that the machines worked correctly. Yet we still hear that the machines can’t be trusted. How is it even possible to continue to believe that when the recounts took the same ballots that the machines counted and verified that they counted them correctly?
    And there were many other investigations. In Arizona auditors claimed that 282 dead voters had cast ballots. It was investigated by a Republican AG and they found one. In Georgia, the number was four. In Arizona, they checked the ballots for bamboo fibers after an accusation was made that fake ballots had been flown in from South Korea. It’s all nonsense, but at least it was investigated. And those facts don’t make any difference to those who just “know” that the election was stolen.
    So my strong belief is that there was nothing further the government could have done to convince those that believe the election was stolen that it wasn’t. Because they aren’t arguing in good faith.
    So tell me where I’m wrong. Tell me where the evidence is that the election was stolen. And explain why it was never heard in court.
    And also explain to me what difference any network’s call on election night makes. Perhaps it shows bias from that network. But it has literally zero to do with the official results. Yet somehow Fox’s call on Arizona has been turned into something bad, not because it wasn’t right, but because it wasn’t what Trump wanted.

  6. Someone in this comment section — a comment section that almost NEVER works when it comes to posting replies — wrote “So if you, or anyone else, want to claim that the election was stolen, then it’s up to you to bring evidence and convince an impartial judicial system that you’re right.”

    The basic ignorance of that statement is rooted in the FACT that the EVIDENCE is controlled by government, not the citizens. The entity that’s doing the cheating is also the entity that possesses and controls the evidence necessary to prove there was cheating.

    So contrary to that commenter’s bogus argument, the burden of proof that an election was rigged is NOT — or SHOuLD NOT BE === on the accusor as it would be in a normal court case. When it comes to questions of election rigging, the burden of proof is on the entity that controls the evidence — aka the government — to prove that an election was NOT rigged.

Scroll to Top