Tim Scott refuses to say whether he'll accept the results of the 2024 election

[Schiff for Senate]

The 2024 election has not been conducted.

Every aspect of the conduct of an election has the right to be inspected.  Every candidate has the right to challenge election results and to present areas where there are unequal standards applied, lack of access and transparency in conducting the collection and counting of ballots, and then some.  Neither Donald Trump NOR Joe Biden should be agreeing not to contest the outcome of an election any more than Coke Stevenson should have agreed to not contest the outcome of the 1948 Texas Democratic Primary for Senate.

No candidate for ANY office is required to concede defeat or congratulate the victor.  No candidate for ANY office is required to state that an election was conducted fairly, because not every election in American History has been conducted fairly.  It's simply not required, and the electorate can judge for themselves what they think of the candidate not accepting an election result.

Every candidate has the right to institute legal challenges to the result, and every challenge deserves an honest hearing on the merits.  Presidential candidates do, indeed, have a right to challenge the naming of slates of electors; 2024 was hardly the first time it has been done.

These are RIGHTS that extend not only to candidates, but to voters.  No candidate should be elected with the votes of dead people, non-citizens, persons voting twice, stuffed ballot boxes (by any method), etc.  Indeed, I believe that any candidate has a moral duty to its voters to challenge, by all means at his/her disposal, an election that they have reason to believe has not been conducted fairly, honestly, and/or lawfully.  Stolen Elections are a part of our history, and controversies as to the Electoral votes are part of our history (1824 and 1876).  No one is obliged to roll over and be hosed.

Then he could, as Runeghost said, have simply said he would accept the result IF it was free or fair. A Biden victory does not preclude a legitimate outcome; I'm sure even you are rational enough to accept that it's very much a possible outcome for Biden to win, fair and square.

For Scott to dismiss the possibility ALTOGETHER and refuse to honor the results right now (before there's any reason to believe there will be fraud or irregularities of any kind) is a major red flag. Biden can win, and win legitimately, and that's a possibility that you, Tim Scott, and all other Republicans should probably come to terms with (just as I and many Democrats have come to terms with the possibility that Trump is, in fact, our 47th president - our dreading it doesn't change the fact that it's a possible outcome of the election).

[Schiff for Senate]

The "mainstream media" (read: liberals) do this because everything is always in service to painting their current opposition, Trump at this moment, as unseriously as possible.  Elevating the sensibility of other Republicans can only makes Trump look worse.  This has the effect of somehow making every national GOP politician worse than the last; the liberal media played a similar game with McCain and Romney before it became useful to rehab them as a way to bring down Trump.

No one thinks Tim Scott is a moderate.  He has one of the most conservative voting records in the Senate!  What you're trying to allude to is that Scott is a member of the establishment - he's well-liked by his Senate GOP colleagues and doesn't tend to rock the boat.  That's why he's likely Trump's #1 choice.  

Wb Stefanik? I for one still believe Stefanik is a stronger choice than Scott; Scott's too devoid of personal charm/charisma. Of course, Trump more than makes up for it, so having a  bland running mate may be a good thing in this case, but I think Stefanik provides a good balance and has a decent personality without there being a possibility of her overshadowing Trump (that, as much as the whole shooting her dog controversy, is arguably what ruined Kristi Noem's chances).

[Schiff for Senate]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

Not that I'm justifying 2004 or 2016 (2000 was genuinely rife with irregularities, for obvious reasons, and I'm disappointed no senator had the courage to join in the objections to FL's result), but this is a false equivalence and you know it. While Trump refused, and still refuses, to accept his loss, Gore, Kerry and Clinton all graciously conceded instead of creating an atmosphere of distrust in the democratic process.