Sen. Tim Scott, a Rumored VP Pick, Backs Trump’s Election Denial

“I’m not going to answer your hypothetical question,” he said, when asked if he’d accept a Trump loss in November.

Sen. Tim Scott, a rumored Trump VP contender, repeatedly refused to commit to accepting the 2024 election results no matter the outcome.Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

As the November election approaches, several of Donald Trump’s vice presidential contenders have taken part in what seems to have become an unofficial loyalty test: question the legitimacy of an election that does not end with Trump winning. 

On Sunday morning, Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC)—who NBC News reported in February was the leading candidate for the VP job—showed why he may be Trump’s favored candidate: he refused no less than six times to answer whether or not he would accept the results of November’s election no matter the outcome. 

Kristen Welker, host of NBC’s Meet the Press, noted amid this line of questioning that just this week, Trump falsely claimed he won Wisconsin in the 2020 election (he lost in that state to Joe Biden by more than 20,000 votes)—which Scott voted to certify. But each time she asked, Scott dodged. 

“Senator, will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024, bottom line?” Welker asked

“At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump, and I’m excited to get back to low inflation, low unemployment…”

“Wait, wait, senator, yes or no, will you accept the election results of 2024, no matter who wins?” 

“That is my statement,” Scott said. 

Welker went on to remind him that accepting election results, even losing ones, is fundamental: “But senator, as you know, the hallmark of our democracy is that both candidates agree to a peaceful transfer of power. So I’m asking you as a potential VP nominee, will you accept to commit to the election results in this election cycle, no matter who wins? Just simply yes or no.” 

“I expect President Trump to win the next election and, listen, I’m not going to answer your hypothetical question when in fact I believe the American people are speaking today on the results of the election and if it continues—if it continues for the next six months, we find ourselves in a great position where we get back to another degree of American prosperity. I’m looking forward to that,” Scott said, adding later that he expects Trump to announce his VP pick within the next 60 days.

Trump has continued to sow doubt about whether he’ll accept the results of a free and fair election. Just this week, for example, he also suggested he may not accept the results Wisconsin this year. 

“If everything’s honest, I’ll gladly accept the results. I don’t change on that,” Trump told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Wednesday, when he was there for a rally. “If it’s not, you have to fight for the right of the country.”

A spokesperson for Scott did not immediately respond to Mother Jones’ questions on Sunday morning seeking clarification about the senator’s positions. Representatives for the Trump campaign also did not respond to requests for comment. 

Scott on Sunday also showed he was falling in line behind Trump on the question of regulating abortion. While he previously has said that he believed a 15-week federal abortion ban could be an acceptable “compromise” for voters, he said on Sunday that “there’s no question that President Trump has been very clear he wants the issue left to the states with three exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother.” 

But when Welker asked if his view about the 15-week abortion ban had changed, Scott said, “I have certainly not changed my position whatsoever.”

As I’ve written, conservatives have urged Trump to enforce the Comstock Act—a 19th-century anti-obscenity law that bars the mailing of “every article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use”—if re-elected, which abortion rights advocates fear could be used to enact a national abortion ban. In other words: Scott’s comments should not be taken lightly. 

Neither should his loyalty to Trump: Scott also repeated the lie on Sunday—also propagated by Trump—that Democrats “voted for abortion up until the day of birth.” 

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate