The pull rod design itself would not relate to what we call 'suspension geometry'. The pull rod could affect geometry relating to spring rate compression(but can be designed not to), and that could get involved with roll over if the 'progressive-rate' were too soft. This is normally not as important to rollover as the actual tract width and placement of the CG within the triangle formed by the tire contact to the road. Also a minor effect is the tire pressure/loading. In both cases of softness, the ride would get sort of spungy in a turn where the body leans over, and so then the CG has moved to the outside too. A wider front-end would add to counter that effect.
As you likely remember from the CabinScooters group, truly, the height of the Center of gravity (CG) and it's forward position is the largest factor affecting the choice of width needed to have a desired resistance to rollover. In effect the width chosen is a tradeoff with [fitting on the road and aerodrag] vs [rollover safety]. Their engineering decision would have been based on that and the idea that a 6ft is not too hard to live with. Understand that the narrow rear end is still narrow and allows more freedom in turn than a four wheeler with a square shadow. Avoiding obstacles will be very easy with the Elio.
As an example, the 'indy cycle' reverse trikes often increases lateral stiffness via a solid linkage between left and right, greatly reducing that roll-over softness. This comes at the cost of allowing more bump induced body roll, and therefore less comfort, and added body shake. That vehicle has such low momentum, and that type of driver has low requirement for comfort, therefore that owner base doesn't usually mind those attributes. If you had your kid in back, you likely would. There are other tradeoffs as well. They have a far back position for their CG, so up to a 7ft width is highly desirable. More than that and it's too wide for easy driving. The Aptera also had a very wide width, or something near to that(but not the solid linkage).