10 ms·
Brennan Center for Justice Report: The Campaign to Undermine the Next Election
- lesuorac 1y agoHonestly, kinda hope they did require a passport to vote. 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/2/2025/01/SAVEact-tables.pdf https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/... [2]: https://today.yougov.com/travel/articles/35414-only-one-third-americans-have-valid-us-passport https://today.yougov.com/travel/articles/35414-only-one-thir...
- jimbo808 1y ago> A recent Economist/YouGov poll doesn’t show any party gap on this question, as Democrats (41%) and Republicans (38%) are equally likely to hold and not hold valid passports
- TimorousBestie 1y agoNationwide averages are irrelevant to presidential elections.
- BrandonM 1y agoIt would be worse than the nationwide average. Battleground swing states would swing way right. The Republican voters in the suburbs have passports at a much higher rate than the Democrat voters in the poor neighborhoods.
- lesuorac 1y agoDunno why you're being downvoted. 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 1y agoSorry, how is a 3% difference "no gap"? Am I misunderstanding those metrics? If a Democrat is 3% more likely to hold a passport, that seems like a potentially huge impact to elections.
- tromp 1y ago41/38 ~ 1.08, so it's 8% more likely rather than 3%.
- favorited 1y agoThat's a great way to ensure that only folks who have had the means to travel internationally in the last 10 years are allowed to vote.
- mythrwy 1y agoI'm very surprised to learn 1/3 of Americans have a passport. I would have guessed much lower.
- 1659447091 1y agoIt use to be, but sometime in the early 2000's land/sea crossings to Canada and Mexico required a passport for re-entry. I remember reading most Americans that travel outside the US go to Mexico or Canada; changing to require a passport caused a large jump in applications
- Modified3019 1y agoWe used to be able to afford traveling.
- 1659447091 1y agoThe PDF in [1] has an interesting stat. (from the Notes section) >> 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 1y agoIt wouldn't disqualify them outright, but they have to bring more documentation to prove their identity. This is one reason my wife didn't change her name when we got married.
- xnx 1y agoAnd this article is just covering efforts to undermine the election from inside the US. 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-artificial-intelligence-information-warfare.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/06/us/politics/china-artific...
- cheschire 1y agohttps://archive.is/iTLBB https://archive.is/iTLBB
- docdeek 1y agoIt is strange that showing ID to vote is controversial in the US and that providing basic ID to citizens for free to allow them to vote is a problem that seems difficult to solve (or want to solve). 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.
- buerkle 1y agoShowing ID to vote wouldn't be controversial in the US if states made it easy to obtain a valid ID for the purpose. But states routinely use it as a backdoor mechanism to prevent people from voting.
- cosmic_cheese 1y agoTo add to this, there’s friction from the citizen side of things with a relatively high level of distrust in government that’s been present for decades. If you go out deep enough into the boonies for instance you can probably find people who still don’t have government ID of any type despite being native born and prefer to keep it that way.
- crooked-v 1y agoAlso see the Amish, who explicitly avoid photo IDs for religious reasons, generally substituting notarized statements for them for business purposes.
- antonymoose 1y ago
- Hikikomori 1y agoProject 2025 phase 1 is progressing quickly. How long until we se military arresting democrats?
- tastyface 1y agoTrump is already making noises in the direction of arresting Obama for... election interference, or something.
- galleywest200 1y agoGood thing John Roberts gave presidents complete immunity for official acts then. Wonder how that will shake out.
- Hikikomori 1y agoCourts still decide on what counts as official acts.
- bjourne 1y agoDone: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/06/usa-mahmoud-khalil-released/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/06/usa-mahmoud-k...
- samdoesnothing 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- tastyface 1y ago[flagged]
- samdoesnothing 1y ago[flagged]
- tastyface 1y agoExcept studies have repeatedly shown that there is practically no voter fraud, because it's pretty easy to detect and people generally don't want to commit felonies for zero personal gain. *You* show me the proof of widespread voter fraud.
- samdoesnothing 1y agoI don't trust any "study" on this topic because of how highly politicised it is. Is there anything stopping a person from going to a polling station, writing a fake name, and walking out with zero risk? No? Then you must assume there is some amount of fraud.
- tastyface 1y agoHave you never actually voted? You can't just come in and "write a fake name." People easily get caught for trying to do shit like this. If you can't trust "any study," then you're going 100% by feels (and whatever Fox news is frothing about).
- fzeroracer 1y agoDo you think when you write a fake name they just thumbs up it and don't bother validating anything? Like I'm curious: Can you explain the process as it happens when you go to vote all the way through tallying your vote?
- treetalker 1y agoArticle's actual title: "The Trump Administration’s Campaign to Undermine the Next Election"
- hypeatei 1y agoI'm really not sure how we've normalized corrupt behavior at the highest levels of government. Penalizing law firms for supporting things that Trump doesn't like is insane. Doubly so when they enter agreements to provide free legal services for things he does approve of so that they can "get the monkey off their back" so to speak. 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.
- pogue 1y agoDecades and decades of the slow but methodical dismantling of the public education system & it's standards. Then, propagandizing the public with right wing news that tells the populace what's happening is perfectly normal and thinking otherwise is unAmerican/unpatriotic are two things that come to mind immediately.
- tstrimple 1y ago"We" haven't. Conservatives explicitly have. Unfortunately there are a plurality of conservatives so they get to decide that blatant and open corruption is fine actually. Hopefully the non-voters wake the fuck up but I'm not optimistic.
- EverydayBalloon 1y ago[dead]
- treetalker 1y agoMeanwhile look what's happening in Texas: another gerrymander attempt, since even some Republicans are sick of Trump's authoritarian dumpster fires and the kowtowing Republicans in Congress. And, sensing the impending Midterms bloodbath, the GOP is picking its voters instead of letting the voters pick their representatives. 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.
- softwaredoug 1y agoOne misread of the situation by the GOP: now their own voters would be just as negatively impacted by the sorts of changes they want to make. They have as many rural voters that rarely vote, may not have ID, may not be able to navigate election bureaucracy, etc as the Dems. Like I bet the electoral make-up of "people with passports" skews rather left
- exceptione 1y agoI don't want to depress people, but try to zoom out a bit. 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.
- bjourne 1y agoHonestly, what of it is left to undermine? It's billionaires, Israel, oil, and gun lobbies running the show.
- pogue 1y agoThere's still vast policy changes each side believes in and would choose if the shoe was on the other foot. We're seeing the entire dismantling of basic public health policies, vaccines, protection of our food supply & etc right now as just one example.