Conspiracy theories are spreading about Trump’s win. They’re false.

As was the case with election denialism following the 2020 election, these conspiracy theories about election fraud are false. According to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the federal body that oversees risks to election systems, there haven’t been signs of meddling or hacks on machines affecting the race outcome.

“Importantly, we have no evidence of any malicious activity that had a material impact on the security or integrity of our election infrastructure,” CISA director Jen Easterly said in a statement.

While it’s true that the current total vote count is less than it was in 2020, that’s not because votes are missing —a number of ballots are still being tabulated and the final count isn’t yet available.

It’s worth noting there’s a big distinction between 2020 and the misinformation being spread this time around. During the last cycle, Trump was one of the chief people perpetuating lies about the election being stolen and falsehoods about fraud. Powerful voices in the GOP — including senators and House members — echoed the claims.

This cycle, Vice President Kamala Harris has already conceded the election, and Democratic leaders, including President Joe Biden, have emphasized the need for a peaceful transfer of power. The misinformation this week instead appears to be coming from online observers — many of them small accounts — disappointed in the outcome of the election or eager to revive claims of election denialism from 2020.

One conspiracy theory that’s spread online is that there are votes missing this cycle because the count so far is lower than what it was in 2020. In reality, that’s because votes are still being counted — particularly in populous states, like California, that rely heavily on mail-in ballots.

Observers on both sides of the aisle have floated this theory. Those sympathetic with Democrats argue that it’s evidence that Trump cheated and that votes are missing from the final count. Those sympathetic with Republicans say it’s more evidence that something went awry in 2020 and that extra votes were counted that year.

Neither is correct, experts emphasize.

“Those are both lies. Those are both complete misinterpretations of the data,” David Becker, the founder and executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, a nonpartisan nonprofit that works on election administration, told Vox.

Claim: There were 20 million fewer votes cast in 2024 than in 2020.

Reality: The final count for this election is still not yet in and could take weeks. That’s because a number of states including California, Nevada, and Arizona are continuing to process mail-in ballots. As a result, comparing the current vote totals with those in 2020 isn’t an accurate approach.

“Thanks to slow counting of ballots mostly out west, there are still millions of votes to be added to the ultimate totals,” UCLA election law professor Rick Hasen told Vox. “When all is said and done, turnout will likely be on par with turnout in the last election.”

The changing vote totals is evidence of this dynamic. As Gabriel Sterling, the chief operating officer of the Georgia secretary of state office, noted on Friday, the difference in vote totals between 2024 and 2020 has already changed: While there was a difference of 20 million votes on Wednesday, it went down to 15 million votes on Thursday as more ballots were counted.

As of early Friday afternoon, an estimated 91.8 percent of votes had been counted, according to the New York Times. That included a total of 144.7 million votes, including 69.2 million for Harris and 73.5 million for Trump.

Given that estimate, there should be a total of roughly 157.6 million total votes cast, once the full count is in.

That figure is similar to the 2020 final vote total. When 100 percent of votes were counted in 2020, 155.5 million total votes were cast including 81.2 million for Biden and 74.2 million for Trump.

Another claim that’s emerged centers on how Harris lost key swing states including Michigan and Wisconsin — but Democrats won other seats, including Senate seats in those places. Because some voters in these states appear to have split their tickets, that’s prompted some online observers to push theories that there’s something amiss with voting machines or other parts of the election process.

Claim: Democrats losing the presidency but winning other seats in swing states is evidence there’s something awry.

Reality: Even though they’ve become less common over time, split-ticket voters still exist. Recall that in 2020, Biden won most of Maine’s electoral votes while Republican Sen. Susan Collins won the state. That year, a sizable proportion of the state backed both Biden and Collins.

This cycle, that same dynamic was apparent with voters electing Democrats Tammy Baldwin and Elissa Slotkin to the Senate in Wisconsin and Michigan, respectively, and Trump to the presidency.

“There were Trump-Stein voters in North Carolina, there were Trump-Slotkin voters in Michigan, there were Trump-Gallego voters in Arizona,” Becker says. There’s also evidence that a segment of voters in places like Wisconsin may have supported Trump but skipped the Senate question altogether.

Historically, split-ticket voters have voted in this way because they see supporting different parties as an effort at moderation or putting checks on each party. In some cases, issues with candidate quality could also turn voters away: In North Carolina, for example, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Josh Stein likely benefited because his opponent, Republican Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, was under fire for making inflammatory statements.

The presence of voters who either split their ticket or didn’t vote in down ballot races is not, however, a sign of fraud.

Both Becker and Hasen note that post-election audits will be conducted to determine if there were any discrepancies in vote counts, or in election machine functionality. In these audits, officials do a hand count of a selection of paper ballots to ensure that the results being reported by the machines are accurate. Those audits should safeguard against any potential errors in machines — though, again, there hasn’t been any evidence that such issues affected the outcome.

Broadly, though, both experts emphasize that the US election system is trustworthy and that the process went smoothly this year.

“The election was well run,” Hasen stressed.