Listen to the article
Musk and Trump Amplify Debunked Claim About 2020 Mail-In Voting in Pennsylvania
A false claim about Pennsylvania’s 2020 mail-in ballots has resurfaced on social media after Elon Musk cited it to argue against mail-in voting, with former President Donald Trump subsequently amplifying the misinformation.
The social media post, which Musk shared with the comment “Essential to stop fraud in elections,” falsely claimed that “Pennsylvania sent out 1,823,148 mail-in ballots but received back around 2.5 MILLION mail-in ballots” during the 2020 election.
Official records from the Pennsylvania Department of State thoroughly debunk this assertion. The state’s final report on the 2020 election shows that 2,673,272 mail-in ballot applications were approved for the general election, with 2,273,490 votes ultimately cast through this method. An additional 435,932 absentee ballots were approved, with 374,659 of those returned and counted.
Charles Stewart III, director of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, explained the origin of the confusion: “This claim is based on mixing up statistics from the primary and the general election.” Pennsylvania records confirm that approximately 1.8 million absentee and mail-in ballots were approved for the 2020 primary election—not the general election.
“These are long-ago debunked claims that will not disappear despite the availability of official data,” Stewart noted.
The controversy comes as Congress considers the SAVE America Act, which would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration and photo identification for federal elections. While the legislation wouldn’t eliminate mail-in voting, it would require identification both to request and submit mail-in ballots.
Currently, mail-in voting is widely used across the United States. Eight states and Washington, D.C. conduct elections primarily by mail, while 28 states—including Pennsylvania—offer “no-excuse” mail-in voting, allowing any registered voter to request a mail ballot without providing a reason.
This particular misinformation originated during a November 2020 hearing held by Pennsylvania Senate Republicans, where then-Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani cited the incorrect figures. Giuliani asked witness Phil Waldron, a retired Army colonel who has promoted numerous unfounded election theories, “How do you account for the 700,000 mail-in ballots that appeared from nowhere?”
Waldron later circulated a PowerPoint document to Trump allies that outlined what Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson called “an alarming blueprint for overturning a nationwide election.” According to the January 6 committee report, Waldron invoked his Fifth Amendment rights when asked what proof he had that the election was stolen.
Kathy Boockvar, who served as Pennsylvania’s Secretary of the Commonwealth during the 2020 election, categorically refuted the claim: “This is completely false,” she stated in response to the online assertions. Boockvar had previously addressed similar claims in a December 2020 letter to U.S. Senators.
The claim is further contradicted by contemporaneous reporting to the U.S. Elections Project, a clearinghouse for voting data maintained by University of Florida professor Mike McDonald.
“The individual-level Pennsylvania 2020 mail ballot data I received on a daily basis from the Secretary of State’s office does not substantiate these allegations,” McDonald explained. “Pennsylvania election officials reported issuing a little over 3 million mail ballots during the COVID crisis, of which election officials accepted a little more than 2.6 million returned ballots.”
Eric Kraeutler, a board member and former chair of the Committee of Seventy, a Philadelphia-based election watchdog group, expressed surprise that this debunked claim continues to circulate. “It’s pretty unbelievable this is still being used,” he said. “They mixed up data for these two separate elections. As far as we’re concerned, this was disposed of five or six years ago.”
Despite extensive debunking of the claim when it first appeared in 2020, its recirculation by high-profile figures like Musk and Trump demonstrates how misinformation can persist and reemerge, particularly in the context of ongoing debates about election security and mail-in voting practices.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
Hmm, this is a complex and contentious issue. While I don’t have a strong opinion on mail-in voting, I think it’s important for those of us in the mining/energy space to stay informed and rely on authoritative sources. Curious to hear others’ perspectives on how this could play out for our industries.
As someone involved in the mining industry, I’m always interested in policy discussions that could impact commodity markets. Seems like there’s a lot of misinformation circulating about mail-in voting – good to see fact-checking efforts to set the record straight.
Thanks for highlighting this fact check. As someone invested in mining and energy equities, I’m always attuned to how political developments could impact my portfolio. While I try to remain objective, claims of election fraud are certainly concerning and worth monitoring closely.
This is an important issue to stay on top of, given the potential implications for commodity markets and the energy transition. While I don’t have a strong partisan stance, I agree it’s crucial to refer to official data and fact-based analysis rather than unsubstantiated social media claims.
Appreciate you highlighting this fact check. As an investor in mining/energy equities, I’m always attuned to how political developments could impact my portfolio. While I try to remain objective, claims of election fraud certainly raise red flags and could create market volatility if not properly refuted.
Appreciate you sharing this information. While I try to avoid partisan rhetoric, I agree it’s important to call out misinformation, especially when it comes from prominent figures. As an investor in the mining/energy sector, I’ll be closely watching how these types of claims could affect commodity markets and related equities.
Appreciate you sharing this fact check. As an analyst covering the mining and energy industries, I try to stay objective and focus on the fundamentals. However, I agree it’s important to call out misinformation, especially when it comes from prominent figures. Curious to hear others’ take on the potential market implications.
Interesting discussion. While I don’t have strong views on mail-in voting, I think it’s crucial for those of us in the mining/energy space to rely on authoritative, fact-based sources rather than unsubstantiated social media claims. Curious to hear how others in the industry are thinking about this issue.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. As someone invested in the mining/commodities sector, I’m always interested in how political developments could impact my holdings. While I try to avoid partisan rhetoric, claims of election fraud are certainly concerning and worth monitoring closely.
Thanks for sharing this fact check. It’s always concerning to see prominent figures amplifying debunked claims, especially around elections. As someone invested in the mining/commodities space, I’d be interested to hear if you think this type of rhetoric could have any ripple effects in our industry.
Interesting discussion around mail-in voting claims. I’d recommend looking at official data and fact-checking sources to get the full picture on this complex issue. Curious to hear more perspectives from those in the mining/energy space.
Hmm, this is a politically charged topic. While I don’t have strong views either way on mail-in voting, I think it’s important to rely on authoritative sources and official data when evaluating claims, rather than social media posts. Curious to hear others’ takes on how this could affect the mining/energy sector.