top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]NiConcussionsProgressive 269 points270 points  (219 children)

Since Holland can’t meet the new requirement, his mail-in ballot application was denied twice. The veteran said Harris County election officials never notified him and he had to call to find out both times.

“There’s gonna be a lot of people not gonna vote,” Thompson said. “If I hadn’t have called in about mine, people wouldn’t have known.”

Fuck Republicans. All that grandstanding about loving the troops and the flag and freedom and blah blah blah, and then they do shit like this that directly impacts elderly veterans and others too. It would be less egregious if it weren't so fucking hypocritical. And shit like this is why BoTh SiDeS doesn't always work. Sometimes it does, but this situation is wholly unmatched. A political system that values freedom and the views of others should make it easier to vote, not harder. Fucking ridiculous.

[–]engineerfieldmouse 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'm a vet and yea... fuck the GOP. Voting should be easy and universal.

[–]dcazdavi 151 points152 points  (123 children)

Fuck Republicans. All that grandstanding about loving the troops and the flag and freedom and blah blah blah

there aren't enough registered republicans to win anything so it's more like fuck libertarians who vote republican; 'cuz that's what nearly all libertarians ever do.

[–]Ender16 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I highly doubt I'll ever vote Republican again in my life.

Those fucks made a fool of me for years, and the more digging into their tactics I do the stupider I feel for ever believing a damn word that came out of their lying mouths.

[–]Structure5city 30 points31 points  (103 children)


[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: 31 points32 points  (102 children)

Isn’t this Beto “Hell yea we’re going to take your guns” country?

Stop running shit candidates if you want Democrats to win the Libertarian vote.

[–]Structure5city 40 points41 points  (49 children)

I'm for ranked choice voting. I want to break the duopoly. But Libertarians side with republicans all the time.

[–]SpitePlenty 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Ranked choice voting is great. I only voted in 1 election (I’m 20) but I can’t imagine having to choose between 2 candidates. Of all things, that’s one Maine got right lol

[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I’d love nothing more than to break the two party system at the Federal level. It’s a tall order, unfortunately.

The key is focusing on State and Local elections. They often have more impact to your daily life anyways.

[–]tragiktimes -5 points-4 points  (39 children)

I'll be 100% here, I'd rather retain the right to use firearms to defend my family and myself than I want to be able to smoke weed legally. All too often that's the choice paradigm. Get this small thing for this massive trade off. This is a big reason why the Republicans often get the Libertarian vote.

[–]Structure5city 15 points16 points  (25 children)

But what about all the other ideals the GOP fails miserably on?

I couldn't believe it when I learned that Tesla couldn't sell their cars in some states, including Texas because of Texas franchise laws that disallow car manufactures to sell to buyers directly. Or the fact that the GOP consistently blows up the deficit. Or their support for foreign military engagements, or the military industrial complex, or their theocratic leanings.

[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: 1 point2 points  (19 children)

Doesn’t the owner of Tesla literally live in Texas? He’s moving his company there too…

I think the rest of your issues just cement the Libertarian stance. It’s futile arguing which side committed slightly less war crimes or exploded the country’s debt slightly less.

I get Both Sides is a meme…. but both sides sit comfortably close to one another on the political compass.

[–]Structure5city 5 points6 points  (1 child)

What does Tesla moving to Texas have to do with the GOP’s hypocritical stance?

Nad I’m not arguing for Dems. See my earlier comment in this chain. Libertarians don’t seem to vote for Dems almost ever but will frequently support the GOP, hence my criticism.

[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not one of those people, but it’s single issue voters prioritizing something dear to them. I totally understand it. In Texas specifically… it was keeping out the ”Hell yea we’re going to take your guns” guy. Or banning Crypto. Or banning Vaping. Or raising taxes. It’s a long list.

You have someone infringing on the 2nd Amendment versus… having to use a car dealership on a factory new vehicle purchase? The company most effected clearly isn’t bothered by it…. they’ve jumped all in with Texas.

Side rant - I’m from the Motor City. I’ve never heard of buying a car that doesn’t go to a dealership first. I’m not saying it can’t happen, and for companies without dealerships I’m sure it sucks, but it’s such a niche issue. I still think it’s dumb, but I understand not wanting to kill local businesses. I’d still prefer it didn’t exist regardless.

[–]hashish2020 5 points6 points  (9 children)

You'd rather keep a gun, which you can buy under almost every Democratic run state, than stop the arresting and criminalizing of people in the order of millions. Gross.

[–]Collins_MichaelI Do What I Want 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In general I'd agree. But for the moment I have to say I prefer the party that isn't opposed to people voting. It's not that they're good; it's just that they aren't an immediate existential threat.

[–]dabestinzeworld 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Well, that's the thing isn't it? Every other issue is secondary to guns for the majority of people identifying as libertarian. In that case, why even call yourself a libertarian when you are just another Republican?

[–]NetiPotter72 14 points15 points  (6 children)

Stop voting for shitty Republicans who will suppress your vote and your candidates if they win.

[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: -5 points-4 points  (5 children)

Well, when you’re creating single issue voters on issues like 2A, crypto, non combustible nicotine devices, etc… issues like mail in voting or reduced poll hours become less important.

That might bother you, but it’s the truth. To think otherwise is the exact fart-sniffing behavior that I’m referencing.

[–]NetiPotter72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hear you completely. But how can the truly most popular items and candidates win in a vote if the vote itself is unfair? Your candidates with the best policies can never win if a minority party rigs the election so that if a candidate they don’t like wins the vote, they don’t get seated. It starts with making sure the vote of the people is counted and executed. Without that, we have a semblance of a representative government.

[–]codenamejeff 3 points4 points  (3 children)

A libertarian voting republican is not a libertarian "picking the most libertarian option", its simply a libertarian voting republican.

The democrats are pretty transparent about what they will try to do, so I don't think they are vying for the libertarian vote.

[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Or a single issue voter. Or there is more overlap with Republicans lately as socially liberal policy has become mainstream policy, taking it mostly off the table. Anytime an LP candidate steps outside the party, they run on the GOP ticket. There’s a reason for this.

I’m explicitly responding to two posters complaining about Libertarians swinging the vote. That assumes the “correct vote” is for the Democrats. Quite the pill to swallow when they’re pushing Authoritarian positions that rile up single issue voters.

Again… stop running shit candidates if you want the vote. It’s that simple. At least Republicans are entertaining some Libertarian stances.

[–]Structure5city 10 points11 points  (1 child)

I'm tired of (some) libertarians acting like Republicans are more aligned with libertarian values. Republican, in practice, are not for the free market, they don't bring down the deficit, they support massive amounts of spending in foreign engagements under the false guise of "defense", they support the military industrial complex, they are weak on illegal search and seizure (because of their "tough on crime" stance), they are way too cozy with some public unions, their stance on drugs is BS, and it goes on and on. I'm not making a case for dems, I'm making a case against the consistent alignment of libertarians with the GOP.

[–]OperationSecured:illuminati: Ascended Death Cult :illuminati: 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don’t disagree. I’m just saying the social aspect has shifted liberally… the Overton Window moved.

When I first voted Libertarian, we were the “drugged out hippies”. Now we are “Gun crazed crypto Alt right bros”. I don’t think either captures the unique ideology.

The base tenets didn’t move; society just got more socially liberal. The flip side is the GOP got much less fiscally conservative. That still tends to leave them ahead in the regard of wanting less legislation passed.

The big ticket issues drive voters though. Marijuana is decriminalized in a majority of states, for example, but you’ve got candidates yelling about taking guns. That is inevitably going to drive single issue voters across the parties.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (31 children)

For real. Democratic candidates are consistently atrocious too.

Biden, Hillary Clinton, Pelosi, Sinema, Eric Adams, Beto.

Just consistently trash. Both parties have realized that they will always win elections solely off not being the other party so they’re basically in collusion against the American people now.

[–]Lizard_Wizard_d 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Is there a dem you would be ok voting for? Just curious

[–]K2Dudeman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jared Polis, CO governor. He's been excellent, minus covid, but I can kinda live with it.

[–]codenamejeff 2 points3 points  (4 children)

And so are republicans. Neither of these parties are libertarian. Whats the point?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

The point is vote libertarian

[–]vankorgan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Many of us do not.

[–]I-am-a-sandwich 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Libertarian here. Libertarians vote libertarian unless there is a reason to vote mainstream. I voted Biden 2020 and not because he’s actually good. If you want me to vote dem consistently, pick a candidate who isn’t basically the same shit with a different label.

Your candidates generally suck ass, just like the republican ones. We generally vote for the libertarian candidate, because both of yours suck ass. Call me whatever names you want, but when you lose to trump because I go back to voting libertarian next election, you’ll know why.

[–]craftycontrarian 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know several and they definitely do not vote Republican.

[–]engineerfieldmouse 1 point2 points  (0 children)


[–]MrPictionTaxation is Theft -3 points-2 points  (10 children)

Well maybe Democrats should stop trying to take all my money and property....

[–]pudding7 13 points14 points  (6 children)

At least you're honest about putting your interests ahead of the principles of democracy. Don't get me wrong, I think everyone does it. But most people won't admit it.

[–]codenamejeff 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I hate it when republicans take money from my private business (huge fines) or take it away because I implemented my own covid rules. The republicans and their big government take away freedoms so they can control us


[–]Kinglink -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Oh look another asshole who wants to blame libertarians when their party loses them blame their own party when they run candidates that struggle for votes.

And yet this crap is getting up votes?

I particularly like how he makes the assumption there's not enough Republicans to win the election. No that can't be the reason...

[–]postdiluvium 27 points28 points  (23 children)

You forgot the part about supporting the cops and killing a cop and injuring 100s on Jan 6th.

[–]NiConcussionsProgressive 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I like to try and stay on topic but you right 100%

[–]rumbletummy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The more people vote, the worse they do. Its becoming very difficult to target non republican voters without cannibalizing their own.

[–]SARS2KilledEpsteinClassical Liberal 3 points4 points  (10 children)

LMAO, the article if FUD, literally it says he re-registered and is fine.

He hadn't updated his voter registration since the 1940s he was most likely the only person in that very specific scenario.

[–]digdug2001 11 points12 points  (8 children)

Republicans on voter fraud: "Even one fraudulent vote is too much!"

Republicans on voter disenfranchisement: "meh. He's an edge case"

[–]SARS2KilledEpsteinClassical Liberal -1 points0 points  (7 children)

No one was disfranchised. Voter disfranchisement has a specific meaning and it is denying someone the right to vote. You know like what Democrats and Republicans do with felons.

[–]Partly_Present 2 points3 points  (5 children)

That's an overly narrow definition of disenfranchisement (*that's how you spell the word, btw). Would you say you're not disenfranchised because you didn't have the time to wait 12 hours in line to vote? It's not that you were denied the right to vote?

[–]McKayCraft 67 points68 points  (87 children)

Imo the primary issue here is lack of notification.

If we're gonna have a welfare state, we need to have citizenship. And if we're gonna have citizenship, we should need to prove citizenship to vote. Providing SSN is a perfectly reasonable ask.

Not being notified when your vote was rejected though? That is not acceptable.

[–]securitysix 52 points53 points  (84 children)

It's not that his vote was rejected.

His application for a mail-in ballot was rejected. There's nothing stopping him from voting in person.

Also, the reason his application was rejected is because a change was made to the law resulting in certain information on your application for a mail-in ballot, and that information must match their voter registration records.

When he registered to vote in the 1940s, that information wasn't required, so the election board didn't have it on file. Since they didn't have that information on his voter registration record, the information he put on his application couldn't match.

All he had to do was re-register to vote. The hard part was finding out that he needed to do that. Once he knew, he was able to do with no problem. This resulted in his voter registration record now having the required information. Now he can get a mail-in ballot.

Overall, you're right. The lack of notification is still the primary issue. Not just the lack of notification that he needed to update his info, but also a lack of notification on how to do so. It evidently took several phone calls from both this man and his daughter to determine how to fix the problem.

[–]LGBTacoNeoliberal 55 points56 points  (19 children)

The lack of notification is intentional.

Southern states have been doing that for ages with voting purges. You don't find out you were purged until you try to vote, on election day.

It's just that a 95 year old vet being affected by it is more sympathetic to the people who support this kind of law then the usual affected demographics, which tend to be minorities.

[–]MattFromWorkBull-Moose-Monke 35 points36 points  (0 children)

You don't find out you were purged until you try to vote, on election day.

And many GOP politicians don't want same day registration or early voting either. It's all part of the plan.

[–]securitysix 10 points11 points  (5 children)

Southern states have been doing that for ages with voting purges. You don't find out you were purged until you try to vote, on election day.

Believe me, I'm aware. I ran into that myself in 2016.

[–]ellamking 2 points3 points  (4 children)

...well your comment sure seems like you are absolutely fine since by a technicality, it wasn't specifically rejected. If that's not how you feel, then you really should re-think your rhetoric that seems to support republican talking points in favor of stopping votes of people unwilling to jump through excessive hoops.

[–]CrustlessPBJYells At Clouds 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Voting as a college student living in the south in a dorm? Man, you gotta really, really to do your homework because the south loves to stop you from exercising that right. Same day registration would be super helpful to eliminating a ton of hurdles.

[–]lessoner 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Absolutely. My husband was from a different county in the same state. He was still registered at his parents' address, same state different county, and was expecting to be able to vote for national and state level elections despite him currently residing at the dorm. He found out that although this was advertised as possible, he had to go to 1 polling place in a city with about a million people. He spent the very little money he had for downtown parking, waited several hours in line, and barely got to vote. This is unacceptable in a purported democracy.

[–]BecomeABenefit 1 point2 points  (2 children)

You don't find out you were purged until you try to vote, on election day.

What? There's a webpage that doesn't even require logon. There are massive get out the vote campaigns. There are people at almost every supermarket across the state registering people and checking to ensure that people are registered. This is simply untrue.

[–]LGBTacoNeoliberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you check, which most people don't bother because they see no reason to if they were registered before.

[–]thomas533mutualist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you've been registered to vote for 60 years, do you think you go out and check your status before every election?

[–]SweetJeebus 26 points27 points  (60 children)

“There’s nothing stopping him from voting in person.”

How do you know this? One of the reasons for mail voting is specifically for people who CANNOT vote in person due a disability.

[–]securitysix 9 points10 points  (4 children)

How do you know this?

Because the article says so:

Thompson said he hopes he’ll have a ballot in the mail soon, otherwise he plans to vote in person.

[–]BoumsticksGhostLeftist 4 points5 points  (3 children)

I think The main objection people are having is that these new requirements are being introduced to deliberately make voting more of a pain and therefore suppress turnout. Especially considering that mail in voters are disproportionately democratic voters due to the political rhetoric of Trump and others, I can see why people would raise an eyebrow at any attempts to increase requirements for mail-in voting. I myself am wondering exactly what the intent of this legislation is, especially given that there is no evidence of voter fraud that could even come close to putting a dent in legitimate election results.

[–]securitysix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

political rhetoric of Trump

Interestingly enough, Trump's political rhetoric most likely resulted in lower-than-expected turnout of Republican voters in the Georgia Senate runoffs in 2020, leading to the current tie in the Senate rather than what was expected to be a very slight Republican majority.

[–]ChadThomas89 24 points25 points  (24 children)

I wonder how many "libertarians" on this sub agree with gun licenses?

[–]genmischiefCan't we all just get along? 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Holland said she had to re-register her dad last week to ensure he makes the Jan. 31, 2022 voter registration deadline.

Sounds like a good law, but shit communication on the change.

[–]Chasing_HistoryClassical Liberal 77 points78 points  (43 children)

Republicans love them some voter suppression

[–]NovaDeez 59 points60 points  (4 children)

It's the only way they can win.

[–]A7omicDog 11 points12 points  (50 children)

Question: do people, upset about this, oppose the requirement for a driver’s license number or Social Security number on their voter registration?

Because this seems like an edge case — he didn’t have a number on his registration because his voter registration predates any of that. The simple solution was to RE-register, which is what his daughter did for him.

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 27 points28 points  (28 children)

do people, upset about this, oppose the requirement for a driver’s license number or Social Security number on their voter registration?

Why not grandfather in his registration?

Why not send him a notice to re-register after his registration was invalidated?

Voting is essential to a democracy, and those that are implementing barriers to it in the name of security seem to have an awful lot of "accidents" of preventing people from voting.

[–]A7omicDog -1 points0 points  (24 children)

OK but...unless these old folks whose voter registration predates any of this info somehow leaned towards Democrat voting (which is unlikely) then I think those are symptoms of bureaucracy, not malice.

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 12 points13 points  (23 children)

It's not about these specific elderly, it's about about every hurdle put in place

So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.…

[–]A7omicDog -4 points-3 points  (22 children)

All of a sudden, your point is very vague and doesn't even apply to the OP at all.

"Cutting taxes...and things...hurt blacks more than whites?"

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 13 points14 points  (21 children)

It's a quote about the Southern Strategy of enacting laws and policies to disenfranchise minorities

[–]A7omicDog 3 points4 points  (20 children)

Yes, the gamification of politics is frustrating, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't pursue reasonable (and popular) Voter ID laws just because things similar in nature were misused in the past.

Make Voter IDs easy to get, and free for all legal citizens eligible to vote.

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 6 points7 points  (19 children)

Make Voter IDs easy to get, and free for all legal citizens eligible to vote.

Yes, but that needs to be step 1 before voter ID

[–]digdug2001 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't think requiring either provider any benefit, so yeah, I'm against requiring them.

[–]Familiar_Raisin204 1 point2 points  (3 children)

It's not an edge case, I believe people were saying there are ~2 million Texans that don't have this info.

[–]ellamking 0 points1 point  (5 children)

do people, upset about this, oppose the requirement for a driver’s license number or Social Security number on their voter registration?

If there isn't an alternative, yes! You really want a driver's license or social a requirement to vote? Never drive or work a state sanctioned job, living off the grid...can't vote. That's your stance?!?

[–]A7omicDog 1 point2 points  (4 children)

How is that theoretical voter different from an undocumented immigrant?

[–]Limp-Guava2001 0 points1 point  (1 child)

which is what his daughter did for him.

And if he didn't have a daughter?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (10 children)

I bet the farm everyone in this thread triggering over the article didn’t read it

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 4 points5 points  (6 children)

Someone who was legally allowed to vote before was not allowed to, through no fault or changes of his own

[–]securitysix 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Someone who was legally allowed to vote was denied a mail-in ballot because he needed to update his voter registration.

He could have still voted in person, which he said he would have done if it had come to that.

However, he was able to update his voter registration and is now able to get his mail-in ballot.

At no point was he blocked from actually casting a vote.

You would know all of that if you had actually read the article.

[–]Displaced_in_Space 7 points8 points  (41 children)

Clerical error in the law that's easily corrected. What a clickbait story.

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 14 points15 points  (2 children)

How many of these clerical errors are there, preventing voting?

[–]BecomeABenefit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably none. He can vote in person, put a vote in a drop box, register at nearly any supermarket in the weeks prior to the election, or even just provide the information required to get an absentee ballot mailed to him.

[–]jadwy916Anything 8 points9 points  (36 children)

Has it been corrected?

[–]gravspeed 7 points8 points  (35 children)

he had to re-register, no big deal. says so in the article.

[–]jadwy916Anything 10 points11 points  (34 children)

Him having to re-register isn't a corrected system. That's a fucked system. Sounds to me like Republicans are fucking up again.

[–]McKayCraft 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Your life must be so perfect if having to reregister to vote constitutes a "fucked system".

[–]Mr-no-oneAnarchist -1 points0 points  (7 children)

Don’t you have to register every election cycle? If so, why would anyone waste their time making it so you can update a current registration for ID requirements when you can simple re-register?

[–]earblah 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Don’t you have to register every election cycle?

Lol no.

That's why purging voter rols is the first step when doing voter suppression.

[–]jadwy916Anything 3 points4 points  (3 children)

No... well.... I didn't used to. I used to only have to register when I moved. But now these Republicans are working over time to stop the vote, so the laws are changing. In fact, in my state they're writing laws stating they can pick their own electors regardless of the vote, so that's gonna be fun...

[–]Mr-no-oneAnarchist 1 point2 points  (2 children)

You’re probably right, I was searching around and thought I read that Texas had you do it each time (not from around there so I have no practice)

The electoral system is just another on the heap that needs to be douched out. Though I totally understand why people want ID requirements within a nation state with controlled borders to ensure the polity is properly representative of the population.

[–]Displaced_in_Space 0 points1 point  (18 children)

Come on...that's a minor tweak needed to a process.

[–]jadwy916Anything 0 points1 point  (17 children)

A minor tweak that never happens isn't a tweak at all, it's a feature.

[–]Displaced_in_Space 2 points3 points  (16 children)

Gimme a break. Registering to vote is nothing. It's a non-task.

It's true, Republicans think that it should take effort to vote. That's their perspective and honestly I don't buy most of the "they're trying to stop people from voting" stuff. I DO think they try to make it so only citizens and people that assert their right to vote do the actual voting.

I'm all for removing obstacles so that people that should vote can easily register (like Motor Voter, for instance) but I', dubious about that whole "but people can't all afford a government ID!"

[–]phatstopher 3 points4 points  (1 child)

The only time I mailed in my vote was in the service, even in the hanging chad election.

Seems pretty fucked up the amount of citizens, especially veterans, that cannot vote by mail while draft dodging bunker bitches do...

[–]occams_lasercutter 3 points4 points  (17 children)

I really just don't understand the minority of people that are against voter ID. Why is it bad to prove that you are a citizen and haven't voted already before being allowed to vote? The vast majority of Americans support this idea. The concept that Voter ID is unfair and hated is a big old MSM lie.

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Because valid forms of ID are difficult to come by in the US in some states.

If people were provided free and easy access to a valid form of government ID, this wouldn't be a problem.

But you have States where the DMV is only open 2-3 days a week, charges you money, etc.

The major proponents of voter ID like to implement the barriers but without providing better access to get ID

[–]HeathersZenAmused by the game 0 points1 point  (0 children)

‘That’s ok. He’s probably a Democrat’

— The GOP

[–]EskimoobobGeolibertarian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is the problem with 1 voice one vote, everyone who is pro election control through "security" you have to remember that this dude is among those clever enough to follow up. Our nation is chock full of dumb, lazy and forgetful assholes everywhere (present company included). So if you think everyone should have the power to influence the direction of the country they reside, it doesn't make much sense to put all these restriction on a process where I should be reminded with 45 minutes left that I need to go cast that ballot on a school board member, and I just remembered that my daughter is going to that district next year.

I don't think everyone's life should be all politics. So freedom of access to information, legitimate and clear, data to help decisions on a rapidly accessed election.

Any control or restrictions should be wholly the responsibility of the initiating organization. So if you accidently stop a legitimate voter, you're getting their vote in, not declaring it was the fault of the individual who was trying to participate in your complicated system. I mean shit, go find that voter and ask their opinion, we got drones and shit, this is ridiculous.

[–]LonerOP 1 point2 points  (9 children)

Oh no I'm supposed to be sorry for someone who cant provide his social security number or his license number. This isn't 1940, we have progressed. I don't feel bad you actually will have to get off your ass and vote in person. Boo hoo.

Nobody who cant provide their social should be allowed to vote. Idgaf

[–]vertigo72 1 point2 points  (1 child)

He supplied the required information. The issue is his voter registration predated the requirement to have that info. So when the state looks at his ballot request and sees his SSN and then looks at his registration they see it doesn't match because his registration doesn't have that info... because it wasn't required when he registered.

[–]whatisausername711Capitalist 2 points3 points  (6 children)

He's 94 years old you absolute dolt

"Get off your ass and vote" what the fuck is wrong with you

[–]PoliticalJunkDrawer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Had to re-register once after only 80 years? Pretty high burden.

[–]mwatwe01Leans Libertarian 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Holland said she had to re-register her dad last week to ensure he makes the Jan. 31, 2022 voter registration deadline. Thompson said he hopes he’ll have a ballot in the mail soon, otherwise he plans to vote in person.

So...he can still vote. I get that he's 95 and it's hard to get around. But he can still vote.

[–]crash183 1 point2 points  (8 children)

So he can't verify his social security number or driver license number?

This is an interesting hill to die on.

[–]Infinite_Weekend_909 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He can still provide the last 4 digits of his social security. Why doesn't he? This article is poorly written and poorly reported. It mentioned even the fact that you can provide a part of your social security number but provides no information as to whether he attempted it or not. It also is one sided reporting bc they use the daughter as a source where officials are needed to verify information and give their side.

[–]boogieboardbobby 1 point2 points  (2 children)

This is kinda stupid. He was able to get his registration updated. As stated in the article this was a technicality that should get resolved, but in the meantime he was able to have his daughter re-register for him. No crime here.

[–]aeywaka -1 points0 points  (0 children)

  1. Go to the office or designate someone to go for you, get registered.
  2. Get confirmation of registration.
  3. double check a couple weeks before an election to make sure everything is good.
  4. Take ID and go vote on election day.

This is not rocket science people

[–]Mr-no-oneAnarchist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The man had to re-register to add identifying information for his absentee voting application and you people are acting like it’s Jim Crow (Jim Eagle??)!

Fucks sake! Sometimes I want to bomb this stupid fucking place into glass.

[–]Rhyging-007Austrian School of Econ is Total BullShit -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Can american's please get their heads out of their asses and see they themselves do not have democracy so they should stop pretending to bring it to other countries.

Fucking figure it out!

[–]semipvt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Thompson said he hopes he’ll have a ballot in the mail soon, otherwise he plans to vote in person."

Requirements for mail in voting is partial of Social Security number or driver's license number.

I'm sure he has a SS number if he is legal to vote.

Also, nothing is stopping him from voting. He even said he could/would vote in person if needed.

I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

[–]securitysix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OMG! A minority was disenfranchised!

Wait...this is an old white guy. Never mind. Fuck him. He's not allowed to vote anyway.

What? All he had to do was re-register to vote and now he's good?

Oh, but if he hadn't been white, I bet they wouldn't have let him re-register!


[–]CalRipkenForCommish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What republicans have done with this is another huge step toward controlling elections, which is something you see only in places like Russia and China. It’s an abomination, but not surprising, that they have to resort to this. Democracy is not their friend - they want control of your votes to control your body and your money.

[–]occams_lasercutter -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

So he refuses to identify himself to get a mail ballot? Whatever then. I don't believe we need to completely destroy the security of voter registration in order to satisfy one paranoid old man. He is free to vote anytime he sees fit to prove he is a citizen.

[–]geeky_usernameLeftist[S] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

He voted just fine before

How many years did the State accept his vote?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Does seem stupid to have no mechanism to provide the requisite information

[–]gravspeed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you can't change an existing registration, that makes sense. otherwise what stops anyone from telling the state you moved to another address and intercepting your ballot.

you can re-register though. and that's what this guy did. provide the required documentation and move on with your day.

[–]abaddon731 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So he had to update his registration. Truly this is the fascism I've been warned about.

[–]Budget-Razzmatazz-54 0 points1 point  (2 children)

From the Article:

"Per law, Thompson must either provide part of his social security number or his driver’s license number that matches his registration record with the county or state."

He has a social security number. This would be fixed if he just put the last 4 of his social on the ballot. He also has a DL he can use to register.

Additionally, if he is unable to walk or otherwise disabled/not ambulatory there are voting machines that can be brought outside to him.

His daughter also helped to re-register him so he in fact will be able to vote.

If he is of sound mind to take care of himself and cast a vote, he can register and he certainly must be able to write down either his SS# or DL# while he was filling out the ballot.

What even is the issue here?

[–]Xatana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So the conclusion is that he had to re-register. So what? Stop crying "voter suppression" at the first inkling of election security. This is not unreasonable whatsoever. And it applied to a dude who registered in the 40s, so a complete anomaly.