← Elections & Democracy · The Record
TIER B Feb 21, 2025
Verified false or misleading claim

“If states required proof of citizenship, voter ID, paper ballots, one day voting, [you'd know] the results of your election by 10 p.m.”

Scores: V 25, C 69, scored on September 27, 2026
Venue
White House remarks to the National Governors Association
What the evidence shows

Almost everything Trump demands already exists. Only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections; noncitizen voting is a federal crime punishable by prison and deportation. About 36 states already require voter ID at the polls. And roughly 98% of American voters already cast verifiable paper ballots, according to election experts.

The 10 p.m. promise is fiction. "We have never officially known the results of a presidential or other elections on election night," Republican former Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman told PolitiFact. Election-night numbers are media projections, and every state certifies official results over the following weeks. Slow results stem from long multi-contest U.S. ballots and mail-ballot processing rules, not from missing ID or citizenship requirements.

Trump's prescription would actually slow results down. States like Florida and Arizona report fast precisely because they pre-process mail ballots before Election Day; abolishing mail voting and forcing one-day, in-person voting would mean long lines, huge new costs for polling places and equipment, and reduced access for military and overseas voters. Election officials told PolitiFact there is no guarantee of any savings, and hand-processes are slower and more error-prone than machine counts.

"We have never officially known the results of a presidential or other elections on election night." — Kim Wyman, Republican former Washington Secretary of State, to PolitiFact

Sources

Sources verified: July 4, 2026

Back to the archive

One entry from Trexit's documented record. Tier A = contradicted by unambiguous documentary evidence; Tier B = has a true element or is genuinely contested, but materially misleading as stated. How we verify →