TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Voter data for 2024 election indicates Trump did not win the election and the results were fixed.

Fact Check: Voter data for 2024 election indicates Trump did not win the election and the results were fixed.

Published May 29, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✗
VERDICT
False

# The Claim: "Voter data for 2024 election indicates Trump did not win the election and the results were fixed." ## Introduction The claim in questio...

The Claim: "Voter data for 2024 election indicates Trump did not win the election and the results were fixed."

Introduction

The claim in question suggests that voter data from the 2024 election indicates that Donald Trump did not win and that the results were manipulated. This assertion raises significant questions about the integrity of the electoral process and the validity of the reported outcomes. To evaluate this claim, we will examine the available data and analyses regarding the 2024 presidential election results, as well as the sources from which this information is derived.

What We Know

  1. Voter Turnout and Registration: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 73.6% of the citizen voting-age population was registered to vote in the 2024 election, with a turnout of 65.3% 1. This data provides a baseline understanding of voter engagement in the election.

  2. Official Election Results: The Federal Election Commission (FEC) released official results indicating that Donald Trump received a significant number of electoral votes, leading to his victory in the election 3. This document lists the electoral votes cast for Trump and his opponent, Kamala Harris.

  3. Comparative Analysis: Reports from various media outlets, including the Washington Post and CNN, provide analyses comparing the 2020 and 2024 election results. These analyses focus on voter demographics, turnout, and shifts in support between the two elections 58.

  4. Voter Data Analysis: Catalist, a data analytics firm, published a report analyzing the 2024 election results, noting that Trump garnered support from less engaged voters, which contributed to his victory 68. This analysis is based on publicly available voter-file data and precinct-level election results.

  5. Fact-Checking Reports: A fact-check by Reuters addressed claims regarding the manipulation of Google search results related to voting, asserting that there was no evidence to support the idea that the search engine favored one candidate over another 4.

Analysis

The sources available present a mixed picture regarding the claim that Trump did not win and that the results were fixed.

  • Credibility of Sources: The U.S. Census Bureau and the FEC are considered reliable sources of official data, as they are government agencies tasked with collecting and reporting electoral statistics. Their data is typically subject to rigorous methodologies and standards. However, the interpretation of these results can vary based on the political leanings of the analysts involved.

  • Media Reports: Outlets like the Washington Post and CNN are reputable news organizations, but they may have editorial biases that influence how they present information. For instance, while they provide valuable analyses, their framing of the results could reflect a particular narrative that aligns with their audience's expectations.

  • Catalist's Report: While Catalist is known for its data-driven analyses, it is essential to consider their potential biases. As a firm that often works with Democratic clients, their interpretations may lean towards highlighting factors that favor Democratic narratives.

  • Fact-Checking: The Reuters fact-check serves as a counterpoint to claims of manipulation, emphasizing the importance of scrutinizing such assertions. However, the effectiveness of fact-checking can depend on the transparency of the methodologies used and the potential for bias in the interpretation of data.

  • Methodological Concerns: The claim that results were "fixed" lacks specific evidence and relies on assertions rather than documented proof. To substantiate such a claim, one would need access to detailed data, including voting irregularities, discrepancies in reported results, or evidence of coordinated efforts to manipulate outcomes.

What Additional Information Would Be Helpful

To further evaluate the claim, additional information that could be beneficial includes:

  • Detailed analyses from independent electoral observers or organizations that specialize in election integrity.
  • Access to precinct-level voting data to identify any anomalies or patterns that could suggest manipulation.
  • Comparative studies of voter behavior and turnout across different demographics and regions to understand shifts in support.
  • Transparency regarding the methodologies used by organizations like Catalist to ensure their analyses are robust and unbiased.

Conclusion

Verdict: False

The claim that voter data from the 2024 election indicates that Donald Trump did not win and that the results were fixed is unsupported by credible evidence. Official results from the Federal Election Commission confirm Trump's victory, and analyses from reputable sources indicate that he garnered significant support from voters. While there are concerns about potential biases in the interpretation of data, the assertion of a fixed election lacks specific evidence and relies on unsubstantiated claims.

It is important to note that while the available evidence does not support the claim, the political landscape can be complex, and interpretations of data may vary. The limitations of the current evidence include the absence of detailed investigations into alleged irregularities and the need for independent verification of claims regarding election integrity.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider multiple perspectives when assessing claims related to electoral outcomes.

Sources

  1. U.S. Census Bureau. (2025). 2024 Presidential Election Voting and Registration Tables Now Available. Link
  2. The American Presidency Project. (2024). Link
  3. Federal Election Commission. (2024). PDF Official 2024 Presidential General Election Results. Link
  4. Reuters. (2024). Fact Check: Google results on voting for Harris and Trump fixed. Link
  5. Washington Post. (2024). Analysis | How the 2020 Trump-Biden election results compare with 2024. Link
  6. Catalist. (2024). WHAT HAPPENED IN 2024. Link
  7. Vox. (2024). How Donald Trump won the 2024 election. Link
  8. CNN. (2025). Less engaged voters were key to Trump's 2024 victory, new analysis finds. Link
  9. Council on Foreign Relations. (2024). The 2024 Election by the Numbers. Link
  10. CBS News. (2024). See data for key 2024 election results across the U.S. Link

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 This whole saga with Epstein having any impact on Trump's approval rating overall when it comes to the Grand Old Party? Yeah I mean look I think this one surprised me a bit because of all these complaints online going after Trump and the Epstein Fasio might think his approval ratings were going down with Republicans if anything they're going up Republicans who approve of Trump look at our CNN poll the prior 186 percent the one out this week 88% were Republicans how about Quinipiac the prior poll 87% approval of Republicans week out, 90% with Republicans. If anything, 00:33 Donald Trump's approval rating has gone up since this whole Epstein saga started. He is at the apex or close there too in terms of his popularity with Republican voters. Epstein files complaints or not. You just prove that not everything online is real. Yes. In real world. Who knew? Who knew? Amazing. Twitter and X are not reality.
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 This whole saga with Epstein having any impact on Trump's approval rating overall when it comes to the Grand Old Party? Yeah I mean look I think this one surprised me a bit because of all these complaints online going after Trump and the Epstein Fasio might think his approval ratings were going down with Republicans if anything they're going up Republicans who approve of Trump look at our CNN poll the prior 186 percent the one out this week 88% were Republicans how about Quinipiac the prior poll 87% approval of Republicans week out, 90% with Republicans. If anything, 00:33 Donald Trump's approval rating has gone up since this whole Epstein saga started. He is at the apex or close there too in terms of his popularity with Republican voters. Epstein files complaints or not. You just prove that not everything online is real. Yes. In real world. Who knew? Who knew? Amazing. Twitter and X are not reality.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 This whole saga with Epstein having any impact on Trump's approval rating overall when it comes to the Grand Old Party? Yeah I mean look I think this one surprised me a bit because of all these complaints online going after Trump and the Epstein Fasio might think his approval ratings were going down with Republicans if anything they're going up Republicans who approve of Trump look at our CNN poll the prior 186 percent the one out this week 88% were Republicans how about Quinipiac the prior poll 87% approval of Republicans week out, 90% with Republicans. If anything, 00:33 Donald Trump's approval rating has gone up since this whole Epstein saga started. He is at the apex or close there too in terms of his popularity with Republican voters. Epstein files complaints or not. You just prove that not everything online is real. Yes. In real world. Who knew? Who knew? Amazing. Twitter and X are not reality.

Jul 21, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Josh Hawley says the legislation he's proposing will send $600 tariff rebate checks to Americans, but not to "Biden voters": "This is going to the Trump blue-collar voters"
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Josh Hawley says the legislation he's proposing will send $600 tariff rebate checks to Americans, but not to "Biden voters": "This is going to the Trump blue-collar voters"

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Josh Hawley says the legislation he's proposing will send $600 tariff rebate checks to Americans, but not to "Biden voters": "This is going to the Trump blue-collar voters"

Jul 31, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Paul Krugman Paul Krugman We’re All Rats Now Time to take a stand, again, against racism Paul Krugman Jun 30, 2025 Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory in New York’s Democratic primary has created panic in MAGAland. Stephen Miller, the architect of Donald Trump’s deportation policies, waxed apocalyptic: Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, declared that New York is about to turn into “Caracas on the Hudson.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama basically declared New York’s voters subhuman, saying: These inner-city rats, they live off the federal government. And that’s one reason we’re $37 trillion in debt. And it’s time we find these rats and we send them back home, that are living off the American taxpayers that are working very hard every week to pay taxes. These reactions are vile, and they’re also dishonest. Whatever these men may claim, it’s all about bigotry. Miller isn’t concerned about the state of New York “society.” What bothers him is the idea of nonwhite people having political power. Bessent isn’t really deeply worried about Zamdani’s economic ideas. But he feels free, maybe even obliged, to slander a foreign-born Muslim with language he would never use about a white Christian politician, even if that politician were (like some of his colleagues in the Trump administration) a total crackpot. And while Tuberville stands out even within his caucus as an ignorant fool, his willingness to use dehumanizing language about millions of people shows that raw racism is rapidly becoming mainstream in American politics. Remember, during the campaign both Trump and JD Vance amplified the slanders about Haitians eating pets. And now that they’re in office, you can see the resurgence of raw racism all across Trump administration policies, large and small. You can see it, for example, in the cuts at the National Institutes of Health, which are so tilted against racial minorities that a federal judge — one appointed by Ronald Reagan! — declared I’ve never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable. I’ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this. You can see it in the renaming of military bases after Confederate generals — that is, traitors who fought for slavery. You can even see it in a change in the military’s shaving policy that is clearly custom-designed to drive Black men — who account for around a quarter of the Army’s new recruits — out of the service. So racism and bigotry are back, big time. Who’s safe? Nobody. Are you a legal immigrant? Well, the Supreme Court just allowed Trump to summarily strip half a million U.S. residents of that status, and only a fool would imagine that this is the end of the story. Anyway, when masked men who claim to be ICE agents but refuse to show identification are grabbing people off the streets because they think those people look illegal, does legal status even matter? Does it even matter if you’re a U.S. citizen? And the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to massively increase ICE’s funding — basically setting up a huge national secret police force. Now, maybe you imagine that you yourself won’t suffer from this new reign of bigotry and imagine that everyone you care about is similarly safe. But if that’s what you think, you’re likely to face a rude awakening. I personally don’t have any illusions of safety. Yes, I’m a native-born white citizen. But my wife and her family are Black, and some of my friends and relatives are foreign-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, I’m Jewish, and anyone who knows their history realizes that whenever right-wing bigotry is on the ascendant, we’re always next in line. Are there really people out there naïve enough to believe MAGA’s claims to be against antisemitism, who can’t see the transparent cynicism and dishonesty? The fact is that the Trump administration already contains a number of figures with strong ties to antisemitic extremists. The Great Replacement Theory, which has de facto become part of MAGA’s ideology, doesn’t just say that there’s a conspiracy to replace whites with people of color; it says that it’s a Jewish conspiracy. So I’m definitely scared of what the many antisemites inside or with close ties to the Trump administration may eventually do. And no, I’m not frightened at all by the prospect that New York may soon have a somewhat leftist Muslim mayor. Anyway, my personal fears are beside the point. Everyone who cares about keeping America America needs to take a stand against the resurgence of bigotry. Because the truth is that we’re all rats now. MUSICAL CODA Discussion about this post Michael Roseman Jun 30 Edited For a while, American bigotry was ashamed of itself. Or pretended to be. Now it runs the government. Reply Share 106 replies Megan Rothery Jun 30 Edited Take a stand - Call. Write. Email. Protest. Unrelentingly. Use/share this spreadsheet as a resource to call/email/write members of Congress, the Cabinet and news organizations. Reach out to those in your own state, as well as those in others. Use your voice and make some “good trouble” ❤️‍🩹🤍💙 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit?usp=drivesdk Reply Share 31 replies 852 more comments... No posts Ready for more? © 2025 Paul Krugman Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Start writing Get the app Substack is the home for great culture

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Paul Krugman Paul Krugman We’re All Rats Now Time to take a stand, again, against racism Paul Krugman Jun 30, 2025 Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory in New York’s Democratic primary has created panic in MAGAland. Stephen Miller, the architect of Donald Trump’s deportation policies, waxed apocalyptic: Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, declared that New York is about to turn into “Caracas on the Hudson.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama basically declared New York’s voters subhuman, saying: These inner-city rats, they live off the federal government. And that’s one reason we’re $37 trillion in debt. And it’s time we find these rats and we send them back home, that are living off the American taxpayers that are working very hard every week to pay taxes. These reactions are vile, and they’re also dishonest. Whatever these men may claim, it’s all about bigotry. Miller isn’t concerned about the state of New York “society.” What bothers him is the idea of nonwhite people having political power. Bessent isn’t really deeply worried about Zamdani’s economic ideas. But he feels free, maybe even obliged, to slander a foreign-born Muslim with language he would never use about a white Christian politician, even if that politician were (like some of his colleagues in the Trump administration) a total crackpot. And while Tuberville stands out even within his caucus as an ignorant fool, his willingness to use dehumanizing language about millions of people shows that raw racism is rapidly becoming mainstream in American politics. Remember, during the campaign both Trump and JD Vance amplified the slanders about Haitians eating pets. And now that they’re in office, you can see the resurgence of raw racism all across Trump administration policies, large and small. You can see it, for example, in the cuts at the National Institutes of Health, which are so tilted against racial minorities that a federal judge — one appointed by Ronald Reagan! — declared I’ve never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable. I’ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this. You can see it in the renaming of military bases after Confederate generals — that is, traitors who fought for slavery. You can even see it in a change in the military’s shaving policy that is clearly custom-designed to drive Black men — who account for around a quarter of the Army’s new recruits — out of the service. So racism and bigotry are back, big time. Who’s safe? Nobody. Are you a legal immigrant? Well, the Supreme Court just allowed Trump to summarily strip half a million U.S. residents of that status, and only a fool would imagine that this is the end of the story. Anyway, when masked men who claim to be ICE agents but refuse to show identification are grabbing people off the streets because they think those people look illegal, does legal status even matter? Does it even matter if you’re a U.S. citizen? And the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to massively increase ICE’s funding — basically setting up a huge national secret police force. Now, maybe you imagine that you yourself won’t suffer from this new reign of bigotry and imagine that everyone you care about is similarly safe. But if that’s what you think, you’re likely to face a rude awakening. I personally don’t have any illusions of safety. Yes, I’m a native-born white citizen. But my wife and her family are Black, and some of my friends and relatives are foreign-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, I’m Jewish, and anyone who knows their history realizes that whenever right-wing bigotry is on the ascendant, we’re always next in line. Are there really people out there naïve enough to believe MAGA’s claims to be against antisemitism, who can’t see the transparent cynicism and dishonesty? The fact is that the Trump administration already contains a number of figures with strong ties to antisemitic extremists. The Great Replacement Theory, which has de facto become part of MAGA’s ideology, doesn’t just say that there’s a conspiracy to replace whites with people of color; it says that it’s a Jewish conspiracy. So I’m definitely scared of what the many antisemites inside or with close ties to the Trump administration may eventually do. And no, I’m not frightened at all by the prospect that New York may soon have a somewhat leftist Muslim mayor. Anyway, my personal fears are beside the point. Everyone who cares about keeping America America needs to take a stand against the resurgence of bigotry. Because the truth is that we’re all rats now. MUSICAL CODA Discussion about this post Michael Roseman Jun 30 Edited For a while, American bigotry was ashamed of itself. Or pretended to be. Now it runs the government. Reply Share 106 replies Megan Rothery Jun 30 Edited Take a stand - Call. Write. Email. Protest. Unrelentingly. Use/share this spreadsheet as a resource to call/email/write members of Congress, the Cabinet and news organizations. Reach out to those in your own state, as well as those in others. Use your voice and make some “good trouble” ❤️‍🩹🤍💙 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit?usp=drivesdk Reply Share 31 replies 852 more comments... No posts Ready for more? © 2025 Paul Krugman Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Start writing Get the app Substack is the home for great culture

Jul 20, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Voter approval is often required for changes to election laws.
Unverified

Fact Check: Voter approval is often required for changes to election laws.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Voter approval is often required for changes to election laws.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Voter turnout is generally higher in presidential election years.
True

Fact Check: Voter turnout is generally higher in presidential election years.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Voter turnout is generally higher in presidential election years.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Democratic voters are demanding violence to counter Trump's agenda.
False

Fact Check: Democratic voters are demanding violence to counter Trump's agenda.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Democratic voters are demanding violence to counter Trump's agenda.

Jul 7, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks