All the Republicans who have signaled they won’t accept election results

A worrying number of prominent Republicans have indicated in recent interviews that they may not accept the outcome of November’s US election.

The next presidential race is already all but certain to be a rematch of the 2020 contest between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, which ended with a clear victory for the Democrat that the incumbent refused to accept.

Mr Trump’s denial sparked months of farcical legal challenges, backroom plotting, menacing phone calls, and rampant but baseless conspiracy theories about rigged voting machines and lost ballots in support of the beaten candidate’s utterly spurious narrative that the election was “stolen” from him by fraud on a massive scale.

The feverish atmosphere of that moment eventually boiled over into the events of 6 January 2021 when a mob of Mr Trump’s Mega supporters stormed the US Capitol, engaging in violent clashes with law enforcement while lawmakers who had assembled to certify the results fled the legislative complex in fear for their lives.

The billionaire businessman, now seeking a belated second term in the White House, has already warned that November’s vote may also be “rigged”, as he sees it, effectively laying the groundwork for further denialism should he lose again.

While Trump allies like JD Vance and Lindsey Graham have said they will accept the outcome so long as it is “fair”, a number of their fellow Republicans have declined to make a similar commitment, some of whom – not entirely uncoincidentally – are understood to be in contention to be Mr Trump’s running mate and are therefore keen to curry favor.

Here’s a look at the Republicans who have said something other than an unequivocal “yes” when asked if they would accept whatever transpires on 5 November.

Elise Stefanik

Speaking to Kristen Welker on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday 6 January, the New York congresswoman was asked: “Would you vote to certify, and will you vote to certify, the results of the 2024 election no matter what they show?”

“We will see if this is a legal and valid election,” she eventually replied, going on to complain about efforts, then underway, to remove Mr Trump from primary ballot papers in Colorado and Maine citing an anti-insurrectionist clause in the US Constitution.

“What we’re seeing so far is that Democrats are so desperate, they’re trying to remove President Trump from the ballot. That is a suppression of the American people.

“And the Supreme Court is taking that case up in February – that should be a nine to zero to allow President Trump to appear on the ballot because that’s the American people’s decision to make this November.”

Asked if that meant she would only accept the results if Mr Trump won, she answered: “No, it means if they’re constitutional. What we saw in 2020 was unconstitutional circumventing of the constitution, not going through state legislators when it comes to changing election law.”

Byron Donalds

The Florida congressman was interviewed by Axios in March and revealed that if he was Mr Trump’s vice-president and placed in the same position Mike Pence found himself in on 6 January 2021 – a hypothetical that could not come to pass until it came to certifying the results of the 2028 presidential election – he may not act as Mr Pence did and take a stand.

“If you have state officials who are violating the election law in their states… then no, I would not,” Mr Donalds answered when the proposition was put to him, adding that he “knew” some states did not follow election laws in 2020.

Tim Scott

Also speaking to Ms Welker on Meet the Press, the South Carolina senator was likewise asked on Sunday 5 May whether he would accept the results and said only: “At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump.”

Pushed by the host for a more emphatic commitment, Mr Scott said simply: “That is my statement.”

Pressed a third time, he merely repeated: “I look forward to President Trump being the 47th president – the American people will make the decision.”

Doug Burgum

The North Dakota governor, like Mr Scott a former Republican presidential contender turned possible running mate for Mr Trump, took a similar line on the same day when he dodged the question by telling Jake Tapper on CNN’s rival Sunday show State of the Nation that he was “looking forward to next January when Vice-President Harris certifies the election for Donald Trump”.

He continued: “I mean, the American people are the ones that get to decide these elections, but for both parties and for all Americans, we’ve got to make sure that every county, every precinct is beyond reproach, that everybody can be confident in our country.”

While he was keen to stress the importance of election integrity, Governor Burgum was rather less forthcoming when Mr Tapper asked him about the possibility of further political violence erupting should Mr Trump lose in November.

Marco Rubio

Also appearing on Meet the Press, this time on Sunday 19 May, the Florida senator – once derided by Mr Trump as “Little Marco” but who now says he would be “honored” to be the presumptive GOP nominee’s veep – was presented with the same question.

“Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter what happens?” Ms Welker asked, once again.

“No matter what happens? No, if it’s an unfair election,” Senator Rubio answered.

“Senator, no matter who wins,” the journalist persisted.

“I think you’re asking the wrong person,” he said.

“The Democrats are the ones who have opposed every Republican victory since 2000.”