this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2025
398 points (98.8% liked)

/r/50501 Mirror

898 readers
668 users here now


Mirrored /r/50501 Popular Posts


founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
 

Originally Posted By u/kenistod At 2025-04-20 03:55:41 PM | Source


top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Subtracty@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I know that this is a big problem for many reasons. But won't this hurt Republicans more than Democrats?

Speaking specifically about married women who have taken there husbands name. I remember a lot of focus in the recent elections was on suburban women in swing states like Pennsylvania. I know these assholes don't give a shit about the opinions of women, but plenty of them turned out and cast their vote for Trump.

[–] dipcart@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm an idiot so don't take this too seriously but I imagine that, overall, women tend to vote democrat. So even if it hurts women in both sides, democrats need it more. Also, republicans are moving away from winning and more towards accomplishing their goals. So even if it would cost them a voter demographic, it's worth it to hate women. Plus white women in suburbs are more likely to be able to fix the issue behind their voting ineligibility.

[–] Subtracty@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

That makes sense. Especially considering that they don't expect another fair election anyway.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

Any name that is different on your photo ID than on your birth certificate would require a passport to vote. That includes hyphenated surnames and trans people as well.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Republicans have no problem shooting themselves in the foot for stupid reasons. Friendly fire is a regular occurrence with them. The reaction to COVID and the resulting difference in deaths across states and regions are a great example.

[–] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Using a passport is your best bet here. Sadly that comes with it's own challenges, like costs and time. They straight up just don't give a fuck about women.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 11 points 6 days ago

Oh that's not at all the case. They are down right afraid of them, this isn't a whoops, OH well, women can figure it out. This is a deliberate act of suppression just like they are trying to suppress education. Step 1 grab ultimate power by whatever means necessary. Step 2 abuse power to protect it.

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Is the US the only country in the world that doesn't have ID cards?

Decades ago we used to have so many cards and numbers - one for tax, another social security, a driver's license, a national health user id, an electoral ID card that granted access to the voting... things (stands?), all besides a citizenship ID card that gets create basically when you're born (and uodated/renewed every X years).

Nowadays, while all of these numbers still exist (mostly for compatibility reasons, I suspect) they're all bundled together into a unified ID card. Well except the drivers license, that one isn't a privilege you're born with.

[–] yeather@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 days ago

It is generally the state’s responsibility to maintain and issue identification cards and liscenses. The only overarching American identification is your passport and Social Security number, both of which are technically voluntary. The Real ID act you might have heard about in the news recently is supposed to more closely unify the various liscenses into a similar format for air travel and voting compliance, but many still do not have this new form of ID.

America created the Social Security number and kind of gave up.

[–] kenopsik@lemm.ee 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

They are trying to keep women from .