There's also the rest of the world: "China Turns to A.I. in Information Warfare" https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/06/us/politics/china-artific...
My anecdote: I am an EU citizen living in another EU country. As such, I am permitted to vote in local and European elections. When I moved to my current village I registered with the local town hall online. I sent a scan of my national ID card (for my home country) and they registered me to vote for the elections I’m eligible to vote for. Ahead of the elections, they post me a physical election card telling me where to vote (always the same place in the village), and on the day I take my card and ID and vote.
It’s basically frictionless. It’s no problem to register online with a foreign ID document, and it’s no problem to present a foreign ID card alongside my election card on the day when I vote.
If I turned up to vote without my election card or my ID, I would be refused the chance to vote. That makes sense to me and showing ID to vote is not questioned by anyone.
How does that compare to a notoriously unfriendly nation like Germany?
In any case, my understanding is virtually any nation in Central and South America requires identification to vote. If the third-world poverty stricken nations make it work there is no reason the rich United States cannot.
If anyone is wondering, an enhanced drivers license is not the same as a "REAL ID". A "REAL ID" does not indicate citizenship status, which the SAVE act requires.
https://campaignlegal.org/sites/default/files/2025-01/CLC%20...
https://www.sos.mn.gov/media/zzia53yr/033125-secretaries-of-...
That seems like the worst case scenario though? I don't think homeless people should be disenfranchised, but at the same time it's unfair to pretend the typical experience of getting a voter id resembles whatever the TV show is depicting either.
I think it's become significantly worse since COVID & REAL ID requirements, but it's always been a Kafkaesque nightmare to try & get the proof of who you legally are. And, not to mention, it's a paper form that you can't just pull up digitally, so if you don't take precautions, it's easy to misplace.
The state I was born in decided to outsource the handling of birth certificates to some shit tier consulting firm.
In order to get my birth certificate shipped to me, I would have to wait over six months simply to process my request (ostensibly due to Covid, but this was 2023). It would have been quicker for me to walk hundreds of miles and get it in person. Thankfully I lucked out and found an old one.
Just a reminder that this is the shit politicians mean when they talk about privatizing government services.
Slowly but sure, the USPS, the NWS, and public broadcasting is being destroyed so private entities can scoop up the leftovers or take over in their stead.
But even setting aside homeless, US states have a very documented, very public history of disenfranchising African American voters.
* 1890-1960 you've got "literacy tests" that would routinely fail black voters but allow white voters through
* 1800-1960 you've got poll taxes which was used strategically in places to harm black & sometimes even poor white voters, mostly to suppress black voters. This by the way is where a lot of the sensitivity comes up around driver's licenses and ID cards - it's frequently referred to as a modern day poll tax.
* "Grandfather" clauses where if you grandfather could vote before the Civil War then you could bypass literacy tests & poll taxes.
Let's fast forward lest you think this is an "old" problem.
* In the 1960s you've got racial gerrymandering which starts to become popular as previous mechanisms are disallowed (this by the way still happens today & the GOP will frequently try to whitewash it as a political move and it just so happens that the Democratic party is predominantly black & the current SCOTUS has allowed that kind of fig leaf).
* Voter roll purges frequently seem to target black communities.
* Felon disenfranchisement laws seem "equal access" until you realize that African Americans are jailed in a 2:1 ratio to white people.
* North Carolina in 2013 cut early voting and same-day registration specifically targeting Black voters (as ruled on by the 4th circuit). Alabama in 2015 closed DMVs and polling places making it hard to get an ID AND to vote (closures centered in majority-Black counties). Wisconsin in 2016 had DMV clerks caught on tape intentionally giving incorrect information to deter voters from getting ID. Georgia in 2018 closed a huge amount of polling places centered in black majority districts. Texas as well (these counties had been protected by the VRA).
Sure, the most impacted tend to be poor people, but regardless of income, it's almost always got a racial bent by most of these power centers. Pretending like racism is a solved problem in America is being willfully blind.
Im not sure how you got that impression when I specifically acknowledged that homeless not being able to get id is a real issue.
> but at the same time it's unfair to pretend the typical experience of getting a voter id resembles whatever the TV show is depicting either.
"Typical" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Is it typical in your socioeconomic class? No probably not. Is it typical in terms of many millions of people experience this problem every election cycle? Yes.
> when I specifically acknowledged that homeless not being able to get id is a real issue.
In one breadth you acknowledge it and then say "but is it really that big a deal?" in the next. That's minimization.
Do you honestly think the median person who can't vote because of voter ID laws is experiencing the same level of difficulty as a homeless person trying to get an ID? If not, then maybe you shouldn't accuse other people of ""Typical" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here".
Pretending like voter ID laws are about the median voter is being willfully blind. If it was, they'd be pared with "free ID" legislation and making sure there's polling places commensurate with the size of population centers. But it's not - it's always purely about disenfranchising people. I'm all for voter ID laws if and only if they're pared with making voting easier. As standalone measures intended to harm specific groups I'm not in favor of them.
You're assuming the theoretical US system would be the same and not be made arbitrarily complex by Republicans.
All the support systems that help ID cards be fairly distributed to citizens are under-documented for the populace and under-supported by the administration.
It's ripe for the authoritarian takeover that is currently underway here.
One of the blockers to a national ID system in the US, that would result in voter ID no longer posing any substantive obstacle to voting, has been anti-government paranoia; but another, if you're not aware, has been fundamentalist Christianity and its eschatology -- fundamentalist Christians may associate the idea of a national ID with the "mark of the beast".
The amusing thing here of course is that while Trump's attempt to unilaterally impose ID rules is illegal, if it were successful, it would likely be an own goal. Formerly, the sort of person who is likely to not have any sort of ID -- someone disconnected from any systems that would require it -- was more likely to vote Democratic than Republican, but in recent years, this has reversed. While I can't cheer for breaking election laws (or for a court ruling that this is in fact legal, because it shouldn't be considered so), it would at least be amusing if this backfired.
This was absolutely true during the 2000s.
The huge irony is that having a national ID (central authenticator issuing globally unique identifiers) is the only way to protect PII, at the field level, at rest.
Per the Translucent Database strategy. Which I won't repeat here. Unless the peanut gallery develops a genuine interest.
In other words, not having Real ID (or equiv) enables our panoptic surveillance capitalistic dystopia.
There was plenty of it in the lead-up to 2000, too. I had a family member who in the late 90s got swept up in some of the religious internet mania surrounding the mark that was tying it to the Y2K bug and all sorts of other things. It remains some of the most bonkers stuff I’ve ever seen, even in the modern era of heightened internet craziness.
Preventing non-citizens from voting. Some counties in the US have almost half of the population who are non-citizens. It's great that we have so many people wanting to come to the states, but they can't vote until they become citizens. This is not a controversial issue anywhere except in the US.
> There is no evidence that unauthorized immigrants, green-card holders, or immigrants on temporary visas are voting in significant numbers, despite some claims that “millions” of noncitizens are voting in U.S. elections. In fact, audits by election officials and numerous studies reflect that voter fraud by noncitizens is extremely rare.
> A [Heritage Foundation database](https://electionfraud.heritage.org/search?combine=citizenshi...) of election fraud cases identified just 23 instances of noncitizen voting between 2003 and 2022.
Even in your ideal scenario where ID is a hard requirement and nothing should slip through the cracks, you could still introduce doubt somewhere in the chain (e.g. did the poll worker actually check your ID?)
And I don’t believe the whole “the mean republicans won’t let us!” narrative. Democrats controlled the executive branch 12 of the last 16 years and control half the states. If they care about voters rights, why haven’t we tried to fix this?
American exceptionalism is a real thing, unfortunately. And what I've found is that when confronted with a flaw or aspect of their society that could be improved, Americans tend to work backwards from the problem and try to explain away the problem, while inventing ridiculous hypotheticals for why other countries implementations won't work.
See: this thread and voter ID, any kind of firearm laws, gerrymandering, lack of public transport, etc.
Let's take the fact that sales tax isn't baked into the price in the US, a common criticism of the US. I understand the sales tax is different per state. Not having the sales tax baked in is an annoyance, and I believe almost everybody would agree having it baked in would be an improvement.
I don't understand why Americans work backwards to try and explain it away. I've genuinely seen comments such as:
"What if the sales tax changes often? Then they have to reprint all the labels" (does this actually happen that often?)
"They have to print different labels for each state" (Many stores already print different labels for regional pricing, or use e-ink)
"It's not that hard to just compute +X%, just get better at math" (It's not hard but what's wrong with transparency and clarity with the price?)
It's that kind of discussion that my comment is referring to.
Your assumptions about lack of ID = easy fraud is misguided.
> Every other country can do it, why not the US?
Elections are handled by the States themselves and so trying to tackle this on a federal level through the executive or Congress probably wouldn't go over very well considering it'd go against the constitution[1] (although that doesn't seem to be that big of a problem these days)
0: https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-verificat...
1: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S4-C1-2/...
You are saying that the problem would be a non-problem if only we had voter ID was. However the evidence before you (and that includes evidence collected by conservative organizations that generally align with politically motivated voter suppression) is that the problem is effectively already a non-problem, due in part to the many other controls in place around voter registration and vote counting. Meanwhile there is quite a bit of evidence showing that your favorite solution to the non-problem is itself problematic, measurably so in the historical record.
You are of course welcome to continue believing whatever you want to believe. But it's hopefully obvious by now to anyone reading this thread that your beliefs are not aligned with facts.
It's like arguing that Python is bad because it has dynamic types, and if we all just adopted static types in Python then all type errors in Python would go away. Even if that is true, it's a ridiculous position to hold.
If you want voter ID to be a thing, then you need to first establish a nationwide ID system that is equitable in terms of access. Until that exists, voter ID is a bad idea in the USA.
I still maintain that this should be a non-issue. ID’s are issued by the state, and they are the entities responsible for voting and voter registration. You don’t need a national database to fix this.
Look at the problems in this country
23 instances. 23.
As an analogy, let's say I'm triaging a broken neck, a burn, a gunshot wound, a compound fracture, a stab wound, a broken toe, and a hangnail.
If Voter ID were to be placed somewhere on here, it would be below hangnail.
This is smoke and mirrors nonsense that is using minorities and trans people as a scapegoat and distraction.
How much fucking richer are people getting? Poor people have been convinced by rich people that their problems are the other poor people. It's insane. You can pull this pattern out of every modern fascist government and yet people are lacking on to it like a bunch of suckers. It's embarrassing. We should be fucking ashamed of ourselves.
We're arguing over the color of the bandaid for the hangnail.
That's why I don't give a fuck about voter ID, because the people that give a fuck about voter ID have been fucking duped, and I don't know how to reason with that human, so I just have given up trying and scream into the void.
If somebody will streamline the process and actually fund some DMVs to get this done I'd be all for it - but they won't, because it's not the point, they'll just mandate it as a form of voter suppression without doing anything to fix the infrastructure problem.
deep sigh
All I can hope for is that we punish this behavior in the future when grifting and violating civil rights isn't the normal thing to do.
True, Democrats and others have gerrymandered too. But I sense that most people don't want the gerrymander to be possible. Yet we can't get it changed because we're beholden to some dead guys who laid down rules hundreds of years ago, which none of us agreed to or had any input on; and we don't really have representatives in Congress to change things according to law the way we want them to, because they self-deal (looking at you, Rick Scott) and because Citizens United cemented the power of those who really get representation —those with money, and corporations. The People will revolt if things don't change fast.
Like I bet the electoral make-up of "people with passports" skews rather left
1. This is just one part of the slope from which the republic has been sliding down from anocracy towards autocracy.
2. You, reading and trying to process this, are an exception. Now imagine that the vast majority of the public does not have any overview and is not aware, being smothered in us-vs-them vibes.
3. You, being a normal human being, trying to make sense of it, trying to see if you can interpret this as normal. When we see something alarming but don't get an `ACK` from our social system, we shut off the internal alarm. This is the original sin of the media rooms, as their role in democracy is to see the big picture; they should ACK, they should sound the alarm loud and clear.
lesuorac•6mo ago
It'll be great to see what a shitshow it is when 70% of people in Arkansas [1] can't vote. It seems to be pretty evenly split amongst being the administration and their primary opposition although I guess devil might be in the details [2].
[1]: https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/...
[2]: https://today.yougov.com/travel/articles/35414-only-one-thir...
jimbo808•6mo ago
TimorousBestie•6mo ago
BrandonM•6mo ago
lesuorac•6mo ago
Devil in the details is literally how you gerrymander. If there are say overwhelming democrat passport holders in say NY then you just lose that one state and win the rest.
That said, I'm just more interested in seeing the sheer number of people being told their voter registration is invalid and if that would backfire as individuals who supporter the administration are kinda overwhelmingly targeted (top of that passport list isn't the south).
xracy•6mo ago
tromp•6mo ago
favorited•6mo ago
mythrwy•6mo ago
1659447091•6mo ago
Modified3019•6mo ago
1659447091•6mo ago
>> Note: According to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, 79% of women in opposite-sex marriages have changed their surname to their spouse’s while 5% hyphenated their surname, meaning that 84% of women who are currently or have been in opposite-sex marriages have changed their legal name and therefore do not posess a birth certificate that could prove their identity and by extension citizenship status under the SAVE Act.
Am I reading correct that this would disqualify them from voting?
65 million "Estimated number of female citizens whose names do not match their birth certificate (last name change only)"
69 million "Estimated number of female citizens (15 years and older) whose names do not match their birth certificate (last name change or hyphenation)"
Guess they are working on the undermining females part of project 1525 now
For completeness:
>> Additionally, Pew reported that approximately 5% of men who marry also change their surname - nationwide this would account for approximately 4 million men.
Jtsummers•6mo ago