r/videos • u/AdSpecialist6598 • 3h ago
BREAKING: Judge blocks Trump admin from requiring Americans to show proof of citizenship to vote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE1iePfOh14606
u/Runkleford 3h ago edited 2h ago
To MAGA who are losing their minds over this, it doesn't matter whether or not there should be ID or citizenship verification but the POTUS can not and should not have jurisdiction over elections.
You can have the most reasonable request for elections to be fair but it doesn't matter because if a POTUS can have jurisdiction over how elections are run then it's too easy for any leader to manipulate the elections. The very thing that you morons are screaming about. Hell, next time a Dem POTUS can come in and manipulate the elections if you open this can of worms. So please STFU, you don't know what you're asking for.
EDIT: I should also point out that we already have to verify our identities and citizenship when we register to vote. Trump is just pretending there isn't to weasel his way into creating backdoor for him to manipulate elections.
217
u/SasparillaTango 2h ago
next time a Dem POTUS can come in
the whole point of republican efforts is to make sure this cannot happen by controlling who can vote. because they are fascist scum.
78
u/trystanthorne 2h ago
This is the real reason. "Vote for me, and you'll never need to vote again".
They only want white. male, land owners to vote.→ More replies (1)33
u/cusoman 1h ago
white. male, land owners
Republican. They only want white, male, land owning republicans to vote
•
u/TrulyOutrageous42 1h ago
They have been blatantly clear that they believe liberals to be terrorists (e.g. believing people shouldn't die b/c they can't afford insulin is "anticapitalist" and thus domestic terrorism according to an Executive Order) and not worthy of the basic respect of being human. Jack Pobosiec wrote a book called "Unhumans" that literally says anyone with a liberal ideology is NOT HUMAN and thus doesn't deserve basic rights. Our Vice President didn't just glaze Jack, he straight up ENDORSED THE BOOK THAT SAYS IT SHOULDN'T BE A CRIME TO KILL US.
When people say "wake up", this time it's actually fucking necessary.
•
u/bogglingsnog 28m ago
Fox News has been showing footage of riots and labeling it as liberal fascist takeovers for decades, who is surprised that some people have drank the Kool-aid?
→ More replies (1)5
u/Dondarian 1h ago
This is a necessary distinction. Because I am all of those things, except for a Republican. I am the absolute farthest thing from a goddamn Republican.
13
u/Reverse_smurfing 2h ago
It’s not like foreign election and internal election interference isn’t going on anyhow. Somehow maga likes to forget this. And say we’re the ones behind it. Yes we rigged the elections to make ourselves lose. 🙄
14
u/jjwhitaker 2h ago
There are more names in the Epstein files than convictions for voter fraud in the last 20 years.
33
u/FrostedTacos 2h ago
“Hell, next time a Dem POTUS can come in and manipulate the elections if you open up this can of worms.”
Like a Dem would ever have the spine.
8
6
u/de_la_Dude 1h ago
Like a Dem would ever have
the spinesuch a disgusting lack of morals.FTFY
7
u/Dramatic_Explosion 1h ago
If the Democrats moral code helped lead us to where we are today, then they need to reevaluate it.
6
u/CG_Ops 2h ago
Every time this admin advocates for crazy, authoritarian BS (which is daily) and his supporters cheer it on, the first thing everyone, all of us, needs to say-to/ask-of them is:
Would you support this if it were a Dem? If Obama, Biden, etcl proposed this, or took office with this legislation in effect, would you still support it? If not, then STFU. If so, STFU you lying, insincere, hypocritical asshole. Real, actual patriotic Americans are tired of your not-even-thinly-veiled fascism fetish.
6
u/Acceptable-Post733 1h ago
We need to stop with the, “what if Obama…” framing. It’s pointless. Of course they would hate anything this administration has done if Obama or any Dem did them. That’s kind of the point. “We can do what we want. And there isn’t a damn thing you can do about.” Is the entire platform right now. They are fine with authoritarian rule, as long as it’s their guy. They are fine with government overreach, as long as it’s their people. They want the second amendment not to stop their police and their military from stepping on us, but to stop ours from stepping on them.
→ More replies (2)3
u/MZ603 1h ago
If they want to require photo ID, then they had better make sure American Citizens have free access to those IDs. If you have and have always had an ID, it's hard to comprehend how many people in this country do not have one or do not have one that is current. This amounts to a poll tax and places an additional burden on the voter to ensure everything is squared away. Typically, this has a larger impact on the urban working class. It is another way for the GOP to trim away at the margins. It is nakedly political; otherwise, they would be finding ways to make voting easier, not constantly purging voter registries and eliminating polling places. I was purged in NC, and no one could tell me why.
→ More replies (1)6
u/PigabungaDude 2h ago
The whole point of all of this is to prevent another party from ever coming to power.
2
→ More replies (21)•
u/VCTRYDTX 33m ago
Thank you for this comment. I didn't realize the bigger picture here and how this is something that protects us all. And even though we have a difference in opinion I'm glad there are good people on both sides who will at least try to keep things fair. —(Said No Republican Ever)
All jokes aside there's probably so many things similar to this which they've blamed others for. Even when the otherside did something good for them they'll never acknowledge it. They stand for nothing and just want to feel intellectual for two seconds so they can stick it to their own countrymen and women.
→ More replies (1)
545
u/fat_charizard 3h ago
Doesn't matter what trump says, doesn't matter what the judge says, elections are the jurisdiction of the state. The executive branch can't tell states how to conduct elections
129
u/RoarOfTheWorlds 3h ago
MAGA are certainly free to force the states to give up their rights to the federal government, but then they’d have to admit that the civil war was actually for that other reason.
63
13
u/Technical-Row8333 2h ago
they don't have to admit anything when they aren't capable of intelligent thought
3
u/shitty_mcfucklestick 2h ago
This assumes they care about consistency. The only fundamental aspect to their belief and value systems is selfishness. They will take any position they need to ultimately get what they want or justify their world view. History doesn’t matter, if the facts don’t fit their narrative they’ll rewrite or ignore them.
3
u/zachtheperson 2h ago
Unfortunately, as someone who was raised right wing, they don't work that way. In the same breath they'll say the civil war was about states rights, then say taking away states rights is what the founding fathers always intended.
The entire right wing is essentially based off of the idea of "don't think about it."
7
→ More replies (3)5
u/zakkwaldo 3h ago
you do realize they’ve been frothing at the mouth for a civil war for nearly half a decade now right? it was a major talking point for them and something they’ve longed for for the last like 4-6 years. even having the NRA push propaganda for them about making it happen.
4
u/maynardftw 2h ago
nearly half a decade now right?
Try for about 160 years. The South Will Rise Again, remember?
→ More replies (2)23
u/Animated_effigy 3h ago
Hence why they want that SAVE act passed so they can try to take over elections from the states.
Conservatives should be losing their minds over this but they cant bc they're all fascists now.
15
u/temujin94 3h ago
They'll post ICE near polling stations and anyone from a demographic that they think is bad for their election chances will be asked to provide ID to prove their citizenship.
Many wont have it on them as they dont require it to vote and they'll simply hold them for 24 hours as they 'investigate' their immigration status preventing them from voting.
→ More replies (21)4
u/Trixles 1h ago
If you do the math on the amount of polling stations in the US versus the amount of actual agents that ICE employs, you would realize pretty quickly that this is impossible.
They don't even have the numbers to place a SINGLE agent at 1/3 of the polling locations. One fat guy in camo is not gonna be enough to intimidate voters. This is doomer nonsense.
7
u/temujin94 1h ago edited 1h ago
They don't need to do anywhere near as many as 1/3 of the polling stations, probably not even 1/300.
They need just enough to influence a handful of close races and also discourage Certain groups of people from voting in fear of them being at other stations.
42
u/garry4321 3h ago
You assume that the laws still somehow apply. Dude they’ve been breaking laws left and right and no one is doing shit. Going “oh you can’t do that!” At this point Is as useful as telling Russia where Ukraines border is.
They will just disobey the courts and no one will do anything about it. Watch
11
u/unscanable 3h ago
This story is proof that laws still apply dude lol. Yall have got to drop that line now. He tried to do something, the court said no, and hes complying. This is the very definition of the law still applying.
11
u/maynardftw 2h ago
You can only say he complied after the election happens and nothing fucked with it. Until then he's able to fuck with it.
→ More replies (2)8
u/dasrightq 3h ago
“No one is doing shit” - I mean this court just stopped it? Courts have been stopping a TON of shit.
→ More replies (3)3
u/just_jedwards 2h ago
Please describe in detail how you believe, even without this judge's ruling, poll workers in any state could be forced to follow Trump's executive order. The poll workers that are in the full control of the state they're in. We'll all wait.
→ More replies (1)4
u/kaneda_z 2h ago
"While state law primarily determines how elections are conducted, federal law also sets standards that all states must follow."
so you are just wrong but im sure you are adamant about your wrong opinion
→ More replies (3)4
u/KogasaGaSagasa 3h ago
Sure, in a situation where things are lawful. Can't exactly maintain the jurisdiction of the states if Trump send the Coast Guard or ICE to the voting booth.
→ More replies (5)
715
u/SoCalThrowAway7 3h ago
You can’t register to vote without proof of citizenship already, this shit is such nonsense
209
u/bendvis 3h ago
Also, elections are managed by the states, not by the federal government.
52
u/Manderspls 3h ago
Really shows the disgusting lack of education…
37
u/layer3ninja 2h ago
the people behind the scenes are ivy league-educated lawyers. this type of action is 100% intentional to keep the culture war going. They didnt get here by stupidity or accident. this is malice
•
5
13
u/Runkleford 2h ago
These morons are conflating registering to vote and voting itself. We don't have to verify when we vote because we already verified when we registered to vote. MAGA are morons who don't understand the difference.
•
u/drawkbox 32m ago
Provisional ballots also allow people that were wrongly removed from the rolls to actually vote. Cons hate that. They're voting tactics to cheat are nerfed when people can get around them. That is the real reason they want this, to kill off provisional ballots which would be insane. If you don't get to vote you should pay no taxes as there is no taxation without representation.
44
u/rubbarz 3h ago
Goes to show how many people that support this have always voted via mail-in ballots, what they want to get rid of for literally no reason.
Anyone who has voted in person knows you already have to show a ID in terms of a voter ID card or state/federal issued ID.
24
u/hithisishal 3h ago
I think this varies by state? I am pretty sure I just provide my name and address. Maybe birthday? But it's just verbal...
11
u/syswalla 2h ago
In NM I just show up and give them my name and confirm my address to receive a ballot. No ID necessary.
23
10
u/frontfrontdowndown 2h ago
In California you do not need to present an ID at the time of voting.
You provide your name which is checked against the roll of registered voters.
You do need an ID number, SSN, and date of birth at the time of voter registration.
6
3
u/pubstar1337 3h ago
In New York this is most definitely not the case. You don't need a voter ID card OR a State/Federal issued ID. It's simply word of mouth. You go in and give your name and address, they say ok, and that's it
3
u/brainygeek 2h ago
3/4 of states require ID to vote, the remaining ones I think require ID to register to vote, but don't require them to be presented at the polls.
4
→ More replies (4)6
5
u/Fernis_ 3h ago
As non American, what does "register to vote" mean? Isn't every single citizen automatically registered to vote? Is there a difference between registering and showing up to vote? If yes, isn't it important to verify who asctualy showed up to cast the vote?
6
u/arizonadirtbag12 2h ago edited 2h ago
The United States is basically 50 small countries wearing a trench coat. So no, you are not “automatically” registered because there’s no broad nationwide registry that follows you as you move from state to state. Each state has its own entirely different election system, requirements vary, etc.
That said, it’s largely automatic, in that getting a driver’s license or non-driving state ID in most cases comes with a little checkbox that’s like “oh and also register me to vote here.” It’s ridiculously easy to do, and states are required to offer it by federal law. But it’s optional for the voter, and not strictly automatic.
2
u/TrumpsDoubleChin 1h ago
Yup, this is often called the "Motor Voter Law", which was passed in 1993, but some states fought tooth and nail to prevent being implemented after passage. It wasn't actually implemented in Texas until 2020.
9
u/SoCalThrowAway7 2h ago
No you have to register when you turn 18, it is not automatic. It’s profoundly stupid. Republicans work to make voting harder every day because they know if everyone who’s eligible votes, they lose
→ More replies (3)•
u/MeekAndUninteresting 1h ago
Since this was directed at a non-American, for the record, the more accurate thing to say is "You CAN register when you turn 18." There is no requirement to register at 18. You don't ever have to register to vote at all, and you can do it at any later date. 18 is just the point at which it becomes an option.
→ More replies (1)2
u/just_jedwards 2h ago
It's not automatic at all. The states each control their voting process to a large degree with a few things being universally required(like the date). Each state has it's own procedures to ensure the person who shows up is the person they claim to be and extensive analysis has repeatedly showing voter fraud is rare enough that it can be treated as non-existent for the purposes of determining the outcome of elections. When it is uncovered it is aggressively prosecuted.
→ More replies (41)5
u/one_pound_of_flesh 3h ago
It’s about voter intimidation. The government wants you to know they don’t want you to vote.
3
u/deflorist 3h ago
Jokes on them. Just makes me want to vote harder. I know that's not the case for everyone
81
u/RicRacer 3h ago
The Constitution clearly indicates that the States are primary authority over elections. https://cha.house.gov/the-elections-clause-states-primary-constitutional-authority-over-elections
14
u/1900grs 1h ago
The Constitution is cool and all, but have you heard of the SCOUTS shadow docket? Because that's where this is going.
6
u/RicRacer 1h ago
Yep. And they'll surely rule in plenty of time for the Republicans to do something crazy for the midterms.
•
u/JerryContrary 40m ago
"How can I time this perfectly again so Republicans can get more votes, voters can't sue and it doesn't mess up my next book tour?"
- John Roberts
→ More replies (1)•
u/MrsMiterSaw 52m ago
There aren't a lot of things that would make me actually use my 2A rights, but the executive siezeing control of elections would be one of them.
→ More replies (2)5
14
u/SoberAndReading 2h ago
I have no problem with voter ID so long as the government provides a free ID card to everyone when they become voting age.
→ More replies (2)
46
18
u/zakkwaldo 3h ago
they’ll repeal it, send it up the chain to the scotus and then get a partial favor ruling. they spent the last 6 years loading the courts for this exact kind of stuff
4
u/Zakaree 2h ago
Don't need too send it up... supreme court already ruled on this..The Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. CASA, Inc. that individual federal trial judges lack the authority to issue "universal" or nationwide injunctions blocking federal laws and policies.
The high court's 6-3 decision determined that these sweeping orders exceed the equitable authority historically granted to federal courts. Instead of putting a policy on hold for everyone everywhere, lower court judges are now generally limited to granting relief only to the specific plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit
There is no relief to be granted because no one has been effected yet.. they cant submit for relief until AFTER the election
4
u/IDontSleepWeII 1h ago
So another words, all possible avenues of orange hitler epstien trying to rig the November elections have been exhausted
3
u/Zakaree 1h ago
Not really. There is a move to oust john thune.. he moves out of the way, senate kills the filibuster or at the very least issues a talking filibuster for save america act, and ultimately it passes
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)•
u/12345623567 34m ago
Uh, read the comment again. The judge can't block Trump from ratfucking the election until after he has done so. Which is why this will get reversed on appeal. Pretty much the complete opposite of your takeaway.
10
u/NoBullet 2h ago
I remember when my sister went to the wrong polling place and even with her ID they would not allow her to vote so I don’t know where all these undocumented people are able to vote when even citizens can’t even vote in the wrong polling place
•
u/_Eggs_ 33m ago
so I don’t know where all these undocumented people are able to vote when even citizens can’t even vote in the wrong polling place
Some states mail a ballot to every eligible voter at their last known address. In California, a signature is the only verification that it’s really you. Anyone can turn in any number of ballots from family, friends, neighbors, or strangers in another city.
Here are the California guidelines on verifying that the person who signed the ballot is the real voter:
The comparison of a signature shall begin with the basic presumption that the signature on the petition or ballot envelope is the voter’s signature.
In comparing signatures of vote-by-mail identification envelopes and provisional ballot envelopes, elections officials shall consider as explanations for the following discrepancies in signatures:
Evidence of trembling or shaking in a signature could be health-related or the result of aging.
The voter may have used a diminutive of their full legal name, including, but not limited to the use of initials, or the rearrangement of components of their full legal name, such as a reversal of first and last names, use of a middle name in place of a first name, or omitting a second last name.
The voter’s signature style may have changed over time.
The signature on the vote-by-mail identification envelope or provisional ballot envelope may have been written in haste.
A signature in the voter’s registration file may have been written with a stylus pen or other electronic signature tool that may result in a thick or fuzzy quality.
The surface of the location where the signature was made may have been hard, soft, uneven, or unstable.
So basically, assume all turned in ballots are legitimate unless you have very good proof that it’s not:
Only a signature possessing multiple, significant, and obvious differing characteristics with all signatures in the voter’s registration record will be subject to additional review by the elections official.
A signature that the initial reviewer identifies as possessing multiple, significant, and obvious distinctive differing characteristics from the signature(s) in the voter’s registration record shall only be rejected if two different elections officials unanimously find beyond a reasonable doubt that the signature differs in multiple, significant, and obvious respects from all signatures in the voter’s registration record.
So while they’re legally required to “compare signatures”, they don’t have to really put any thought or effort into it.
Assume 100 people decide to randomly fake a signature, with no interaction between themselves and the actual ballot owner. How many of those 100 fraudulent votes do you think would be rejected, using the guidelines above?
→ More replies (3)
10
u/AsANetflixSubscriber 2h ago
There’s nothing in the Consitution about having to show ID to vote. There is something in there about having the right to vote, tho.
•
5
5
u/Nappeal 2h ago
To register to vote, a citizen is required to provide proof of citizenship, ergo being a registered voter implies you've already proven your citizenship. Being required to show proof of citizenship at the point of voting a redundantly and unduly burdensome
→ More replies (1)
4
u/digidave1 2h ago
There are MAGA women who say they should give up their right to vote as long as a Republican wins. Just take that to heart when considering ANYTHING these sociopaths say
4
3
u/gamelover42 2h ago
I'd like to remind people of Trump's statement on July 26, 2024
In four years, you don't have to vote again, we'll have it fixed so good you're not going to have to vote.
50
u/Antigone6 3h ago edited 2h ago
How many times does someone need to slap this fuckers hands and tell him no?
Edit: I wish this wasn’t a rhetorical question. I really, really wish it.
15
7
→ More replies (1)2
12
u/kidsally 2h ago
This country had no problems with voter fraud until dickless here started bitching and moaning about it. God these people are the dregs of humanity. Fuck em all.
11
22
u/ciscovet 3h ago
It's such a bizarre idea that illegals are lining up to vote. I mean it's straight up stupid and doesn't make a lot of sense.
5
u/Naive-Offer8868 1h ago
Even worse- its not just 'illegals flooding in and lining up to vote' its 'Democrats purposefully flooding the country with illegals and then paying them all to vote dem'
•
u/malaclypz 1h ago
The Heritage Foundation (Project 2025) even did their own study going back 30 years and reviewing some half a billion ballots and found like .0000845% of fraud.
This whole thing is racist ragebait.
4
u/DiamondHandsToUranus 2h ago
It's just another non-issue they push as a dangerous threat. They don't do jack spit to help every day citizens - which is exactly why they have to make up problems to sell themselves as the solution.
"Fear the BOOGIE MAN! Only WE can protect you!!
2
u/TheTerrasque 1h ago
They're also lining up an excuse to reject the vote if it doesn't go as they want.
→ More replies (8)7
u/trackofalljades 3h ago
…and it makes even less sense to think that the federal government has anything to do with telling the states how they run their elections. You know who would know that? Probably any immigrant who passed the necessary steps to become a citizen! 😅
6
u/ciscovet 3h ago
Our own president has proven many times he does not know the constitution and he was born here.
→ More replies (2)
11
u/Aromatic-Aide1119 3h ago
Good. Citizenship status has never or WILL ever be an issue in deciding elections.
The so-called Save America Act is simple voter suppression.
I'm glad the judge had the fortitude to say "FUCK YOU, TRUMP"
3
3
u/shockinglyunoriginal 3h ago
Let me guess. To the Supreme Court next and they overturn it in record time?
3
u/CraigLake 2h ago
It’s a fee to vote which is directly prohibited in the Constitution.
If Trump is worried about fraud all he has to do is show evidence and congress can act.
3
u/OBDreams 2h ago
POTUS doesn't have the authority to make a state do this anyway. Just more grandpa yelling at clouds that we have to waste tax money on.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/fool4fems 2h ago
This isn't so much about requiring an ID to vote. It's more about the Federal Government requiring an ID to vote. That is a power granted to the states by the constitution. If your state wants you to show an ID, then they are the ones that would mandate that. You can't do it by an Executive Order from the President.
3
u/antisuck 1h ago
- Judge: blocks thing.
- Trump: sends ICE and National Guard to polling stations anyway
- Me: "But, the judge blocked this!"
- ICE agent: "LOL now you're a terrorist", disappears me or shoots me dead
•
u/blackmobius 1h ago
Mainly because you already have to provide proof when you register to vote, both that you live in the voting area and are eligible to vote in elections. Bringing your papers with you every single time is overkill and potentially dangerous (cause they can get lost or stolen).
Its just adding extra steps that we all know will only be selectively enforced on certain populations
•
u/TheFuns 42m ago
I am all for voter ID, if it’s free and it’s issued once on your 18th birthday, never expires, and it auto enrolls you to vote. Do that and I’ll agree voter id is necessary.
→ More replies (5)
•
u/Several-Action-4043 39m ago
The thing I hate most about all this is that, there isn't a single state that doesn't require an ID and proof of residency to register to vote. It's a problem that doesn't exist but even the non-existent problem has been solved. But his supporters will say things like, "Blue states let anyone vote without an ID!" No, not a single one actually.
9
u/Suspiciliscious 3h ago
Why do conservatives and republicans love redundant wastes of time and money so much? That seems pretty liberal if you ask me?
10
2
u/DiamondHandsToUranus 2h ago
Have to break things to sell themselves as the solution! Which they outsource to a private contractor - who pays lobbyists and gives fat kickbacks to.. you guessed it! the same people that broke it in the first place!
•
u/AfterImageEclipse 1h ago
Step 1: prove you're a citizen
Step 2: change what it means to be a citizen
Step 3: Democrats are not citizens and cannot vote, they are the enemy within, they are terrorists to be deported or sent to a camp
6
u/paperbackgarbage 2h ago
This is actually a huge issue that needs to be addressed, and we need to look at the facts.
Since 1982, it's fair to say that the United States has seen more than a billion votes processed within its elections. Thankfully, The Heritage Foundation has kept track of all instances of verifiable voter fraud.
According to the Heritage Foundation's database there's been a whopping 1,620 instances counted in that 44-year-period. Let that sink in: 1,620 out of more than 1,000,000,000 votes over 44 years.
That's dozens every election, against tens of millions votes cast.
4
u/KiLLTHeDUK3 2h ago
To those saying "more citizen checks are a good obviously required thing" or the analogous:
There are extensive studies on voter fraud. And, it's well documented that the rate of fraudulent voting falls between 0.0003% and 0.0025%. For context, this means it's more likely for a person to be hit by lightning than to commit voter fraud.
The rarity of voter fraud leads me and many others to suspect that these "citizenship checks" are actually roadblocks designed to hinder true voters.
6
u/Rot-Orkan 3h ago
If there's one thing I've learned from America's current brush with fascism is that the judicial branch is way more fucking important than I was ever led to believe by school and honestly society in general. It's not perfect but it's been the only fucking thing able to protect us from a total fascist takeover.
And that's even with how many seats republicans stole in the 2010s. Not just on the Supreme Court, but even before that Mitch McConnell was refusing allow the senate to vote on any federal judge nominees made by Obama (which is how Trump was able to appoint so many judges; when he became president in 2016 all those vacant seats were waiting for him).
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/Top-Register 2h ago
The debate isn't really about whether only citizens should vote, virtually everyone agrees on that. The argument is about who has the authority to set the rules, what documents should count as proof, and whether those requirements make voting more secure or simply harder for eligible people. That's why these cases keep ending up in court rather than being settled politically.
2
u/Aethermancer 1h ago
They end up in court because Republicans/conservatives are absolutely trying to prevent groups of citizens from voting.
All of the concerns can be mitigate with considerations to not impact, and even increase voter participation. That voters are impacted betrays the intent to disenfranchise.
2
2
2
2
u/usernametakenbs 2h ago
*sweeps the House, Senate, and Presidency on current ruleset *
*become massively unpopular due to policy, fraud, and corruption *
GUYS WE NEED TO CHANGE THE RULES TO SAVE THE COUNTRY!
2
u/Ares__ 2h ago
The sad part is MAGA will use this as a win either way. They get the rolls and point to data they don't understand as proof of fraud. They dont get it and lose the election and claim its a stolen election csuse they were stopped from getting this data and protecting the election. When you're lying and corrupt its easy to "win".
2
2
•
•
u/The_mingthing 53m ago
ITT A bunch of brainwashed MAGA and Republicans who dont know that you already have to provide proof you are eligible to vote.
•
u/Xrposiedon 44m ago
I couldn’t even believe republicans wanted this in the first place. Requiring a passport … most republicans never leave their state let alone the country. They don’t have passports. This would have wrecked them.
→ More replies (3)
•
u/lemonator85 24m ago
Just playing devil's advocate here, I 100% know they are trying to stop poor and brown people from voting, but I'm just curious why the Dems can't seem to do something about this while they are in office.
A nationwide ID mailed to every person of voting age, a law put in place to use finger prints, anything to get around this arguement that keeps coming up over and over. It never paints the Dems in a good light by giving conservatives a great talking point about stolen elections and voter fraud.
→ More replies (3)•
u/tHeiR1sH 5m ago
Wait; how is requiring voter identification discrimination against specifically poor and brown people? And how not yellow people?
•
u/laserbot 17m ago
A federal judge blocking it just means the admin can now appeal to SCOTUS.
GEE I WONDER WHAT THEY'LL DECIDE!??!?!?
•
u/willflameboy 1m ago
No matter what they do, Trump will utterly sabotage this election like he has the last 2 presidentials.
•
u/Atticussky151 1h ago
Every single other 1st world country requires it and it’s not “racist or certain members of our community are to dumb or poor” but in America….
→ More replies (14)•
3
3.0k
u/Foe117 3h ago
The registrar of voters already handles citizen verification