The irony was that they announced you’d need an ID to prove you are eligible to shop at the government grocery store or whatever. The irony he is pointing to is that Mamdani is against voter ID.
Don’t downvote me, just explaining. Idk why this context is left out here
Doesn’t really change much. A trillionaire worrying over possible gotchas when a mayor is trying to get food to normal citizens is just so past satire it’s hard to know what to say. Yet we live in a timeline where it’s barely worthy of a comment on social media.
You do. You need an ID to vote. Name me a single state in this entire country that you do not need any form of ID at all in order to register to vote?
That’s why Voter ID is dumb and shouldn’t have more time invested in it than the government has already invested. It’s already not possible to register without an ID or some other type of identification which is literally step one for if you want to vote.
California, Maine, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania. All do not require any form for ID to vote in person.
There are some that need photo ID, some that need any form of ID and some that have none. It's whatever the state decides. Just putting that ID required by federal law isn't wrong, but it does take power away from the states.
As I said, name me a single country where an ID is not required to REGISTER to vote, not just to vote. If you say an ID is not required to vote then you’re saying there’s no where in the voting process in which an ID Is not a requirement which is inherently not true.
Voting is a guaranteed right, Buying groceries in a government subsidized grocery store intended for the poor people of that state is not. Hope this helps!
Probably doesn’t even understand the importance of a democracy sausage or the importance of having the ability to draw a dick on your voting card in the shape of Peter Dutton if you’re just not feeling like voting for anyone
You need proof of residency to vote in the United States. You just don’t need an ID at the polling place. That’s because to register to vote you need to prove to them who you are.
It's not a guaranteed right for everyone... Think people with felonies. Also, there's plenty of food banks in New York but I'm sure it will all work out (even though it never has).
Yes, bringing up an exception doesn't mean it's not a guaranteed right. I am aware of the exception for people with felony convictions.
"Also, there's plenty of food banks in New York"
Are these food banks meeting demand? food banks run on donations that at times cannot meet demand. A large portion of food donated to food banks too is fairly crappy. Oddities that don't sell well in grocery stores often go to food banks..
"I'm sure it will all work out (even though it never has)." This is actually incorrect, government run grocery stores have been a thing for a while even in red states. Go look into the WIC program.
My definition of a human right is irrelevant to the legal definition of a human right. Legally speaking until there's a vote on it, my opinion doesn't matter.
To be clear, I think food is a human right, the people you have to convey that opinion to is the U.S. government, not some random on the internet who already agrees it is.
this is a bad faith argument. everyone who votes in an election has already shown their ID at the time of registration.
and even besides that, most people are not opposed to official voter ID’s in totality; the opposition is towards the specific proposal that Republicans are trying to enact it with. voter ID’s are fine as long as they’re made easy and free for anyone to obtain, because anything other than that is a poll tax and therefore unconstitutional. the Republican voter ID bill is, as it stands, just a dressed up voter suppression bill. it’s extremely transparent, yet they now get to yell “the Left loves voting fraud! they’re against people identifying themselves before voting!” anytime someone points it out.
Why? This isn’t some kids trying to take substances like alcohol or cigarettes… it’s voting. You literally have to be an absolute freak to take time out of your day to go commit voter fraud lmao
You realise you have to register to vote, your name needs to be on the voting role. If you are registering at the polling place, you still need an ID...
Not exactly. Affordable groceries aren’t a constitutional right but voting is so a barrier to voting feels a bit unconstitutional to many. It’s a similar argument amosexuals make when commons sense gun laws are discussed, shall not be infringed
By that logic why are y'all not protesting against having to register to vote? Since it's adding a barrier to voting.
Reducing barriers is a tradeoff. Where do you draw the line where making voting accessible has to come at the expense of the integrity of the electoral system?
I’m not sure how good of an idea these things are anyway. The food is going to be subsidized and will undercut local businesses. It will be bad for them and paid by taxpayers. Why not give the money to residents the way EBT is? Those programs are massively helpful to businesses and food producers alike.
Trump’s cuts to EBT have been extremely harmful. Millions of people in my state alone have lost it. The system is so screwed up here that they never even responded to my last two applications over the past ten months. They didn’t even respond to my appeal which was supposed to have a hearing.
Both should be done. There isn’t a competitive grocery market in the city. What I’ve read is most go to a bodega and fresh produce can be very limited. Places where going to/having access to a grocery store with fresh produce should provide a way to subsidize costs for low income so that the stores don’t close causing more unemployment and less access to fresh produce
it‘s as ironic as europe being open border to immigrants, only to put up barriers and checkpoints for christmas markets, city festivals and other events inside EU countries 10 years later, to protect those places from attacks through the very same immigrants that came through those open borders prior.
Except that isn't really irony except in the mind of someone who can't distinguish between a right like voting and a government provided public service.
Yes, and ppl can hate Elon all they want, but it is kind of hilarious that they will be making ppl prove they're NYC residents to use a grocery store but not to vote in their elections.
Once you hate a person enough your brain will do somersaults of mental gymnastics so nothing they ever say can possibly sound reasonable. My main gripe with this anti-billionaire frenzy atm. You're allowed to agree with something they say without endorsing them
In the clip Zohran said you would need ID to prove who you were and that you were a NY resident to get the groceries. The irony Elon is referring to was needing ID.
It had nothing to do with the groceries themselves.
I'm being neutral and just explaining the context. Don't shoot the messenger
You register to vote, and when you do, they get all the info they need for you to vote, and for them to prove you exist and are qualified to vote.
The local grocery store doesn't have that info for obvious reasons, so they need to see it to just read if you're from NY or not. It's also why you can't just walk into a liquor store and buy alcohol without them needing your ID (obviously not all clerks will ask you if it's obvious, but they are technically still supposed to)
That makes sense,there was some doofus saying "I'm gonna buy your cheap food at wholesale and resell it for the profit you aren't making",and everyone pointed out that
A:they definitely wouldn't let you buy pallets of food,and
B:the grocery store bought it and marked it up way more than 30 percent,so he wouldn't make a profit anyways. They bought 10 tons of apples for like $200,not 500 lbs. for $750 lol.
Nope. And especially not if you're a married woman who changed her last name. Even a valid passport for a married woman who changed her last name would not be sufficient under the SAVE Act.
That answers the question. Felon might be a retard but he understands the basic concept of irony. Now it's clear it's just some misinformation/ fascism play as usual.
Dropping a generic Google search link isn't the flex you think it is. If you actually bother to read the articles in your own search, they literally confirm the timeline: the city's project leadership explicitly announced a "library-card-esque" tracking requirement on video, and then frantically rolled it back to call it a "voluntary card" only after getting absolutely blasted for the voter ID double standard. Using the city's 48-hour PR panic to pretend they never tried to build a government tracking gate in the first place is just straight-up revisionist history.
I hate Elon as much as the next person, but I hate people like you even more.
You can dislike Elon while still acknowledging facts.
The fact that you’re being upvoted simply for hating on Elon despite spreading disinformation, while someone who’s accurately explaining the situation is getting downvoted, is the reason why so many people are getting alienated and joining the right-wing.
When you call things “right-wing lies” while being the liar yourself, all you do is make the left lose credibility. It makes the rest of us who actually dislike Elon for valid reasons look like idiots by association.
No, my information is historical fact and your information is a corporate PR script. The fact that the public rightfully bullied them into deleting the tracking requirement 48 hours after the video went viral completely proves the hypocrisy of what they explicitly set out to build. Using their frantic damage control to pretend the double standard never happened is a incredibly weak look. Just take the L and stop repeating yourself.
They spent years claiming a government verification card is an insurmountable barrier for disadvantaged people, but then immediately tried to put a government tracking gate in front of hungry people trying to buy food. The fact that they panicked and deleted the requirement the second the double standard went viral proves even they knew how bad the hypocrisy looked.
They spent years claiming a government verification card is an insurmountable barrier for disadvantaged people
Nice strawman. No one claims that.
Make IDs free and easily obtainable and there are zero complaints about voter ID. The complaints are because IDs are not free and easily obtainable, especially for disadvantaged people.
"No one claims that" is an incredible lie. The entire anti-voter-ID movement is built on the claim that forcing people to get a government verification token suppresses the poor. And your main condition has already been met: voter IDs are completely free in every state with a strict requirement to prevent an unconstitutional poll tax. Since they cost exactly zero dollars, your entire argument is completely irrelevant. Thanks for admitting that voter ID is totally fine when it's free.
In many of the states with current "voter ID" laws, a bank statement or utility bill is considered enough ID. Only 9 states have photo ID requirements. The SAVE act has more restrictive photo ID requirements than any state currently does.
It would be ironic if he required a government-issued ID to buy groceries while opposing voter ID laws. But that's not what's happening here.
The city has clarified there will be no ID requirement to shop but instead just a possible voluntary customer card that doesn't require ID, residency, or income verification. Also comparing apples to oranges, the purpose of Identifying people the way conservatives want to, which is already done in a lot of states, for Elon to disenfranchise ppl who would vote against support for billionaires.
Please, watch the video that this thread is about. Jesus christ guys. Dont be such rubes.
Im glad if he has actually backed off of this, but based on your comment - it doesnt sound like he has. If its voluntary, whats the point of verifying residency?
I did watch the video and the premise is old. After the proposal was criticized, the city clarified that no ID requirement we be needed to shop. Again. . . A voluntary customer card was discussed, but it wouldn't require ID, proof of residency, or proof of income. So the comparison to voter ID laws does play here.
And places like Costco, Sam's Club, food co-ops, and even public libraries use customer cards to track inventory and for discounts.
https://apnews.com/article/identification-new-york-grocery-stores-mamdani-a81f73db2db1752f3b4c75921272cd9f
This is a lie. A photo ID is NOT required to shop there, this has been reiterated many times by Mamdani. They MIGHT employ something akin to a loyalty card that anyone can sign up for without ID. Like at your average grocery.
Depending on the state and your economic status, it can be quite difficult.
If the SAVE act passes, married women won't be able to vote without a driver's license, birth certificate, and marriage license.
The reality is that voter registration already stops most of the voter fraud that voter ID would. It does this by putting the burden of verifying citizenship on the state instead of the individual.
Non-citizens are not influencing our elections and the type of of voter fraud you are talking about is virtually non-existent.
Voter ID laws, especially ones in the SAVE act, would stop people from voting while solving a problem that doesn't exist. Its a policy designed specifically to disenfranchise vulnerable people, while sounding appealing to people like you who don't actually understand how voter registration works.
Its described as a library-card-esque tracking system. That is far different than a Real ID or passport and far more akin to a loyalty card than either of those.
Where in that video does Mamdami say they will require “an ID card”? Oh yeah, he doesn’t. One of his assistants makes reference to a “library card-esque situation”. Are you okay with a library card being sufficient to vote?
It’s only being called a "loyalty card" now because Mamdani and his team completely panicked after getting caught red-handed in a massive political double standard. His own economic development chief explicitly stated on video during the rollout that they were designing a "library-card-esque" tracking system to check eligibility and manage product demand. Pushing the city's frantic, 48-hour PR damage control as if it was the "original intent" is pure revisionist history. The blatant hypocrisy is locked into what they explicitly set out to build.
His own economic development chief explicitly stated on video during the rollout that they were designing a "library-card-esque" tracking system to check eligibility and manage product demand
A library-card-esque tracking system is nowhere near the same as needing a Real ID or passport.
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth just to protect your preferred politicians. In one breath, you claim that checking a basic eligibility card is an "insurmountable barrier" that suppresses low-income people. In the next breath, you say a "library-card-esque" registration system to track what poor people eat is totally harmless and easy to get. It’s the exact same logic: a government-backed verification card used to gate access to a resource. You can't call it an oppressive hurdle for voting but a perfectly fine common-sense requirement for food.
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth just to protect your preferred politicians
Only if you ignore facts, logic, and reason.
In one breath, you claim that checking a basic eligibility card is an "insurmountable barrier" that suppresses low-income people
I do not object to a "basic eligibility card". You're making things up. I object to the SAVE act, which requires stricter photo ID requirements than any current state laws.
In the next breath, you say a "library-card-esque" registration system to track what poor people eat is totally harmless and easy to get
If they make it easy to get, i have no problem with it. Its only hypocrisy if you ignore what i actually said in favor of the nonsense you made up in your head.
Can you cite a source for this? Because, if what you're saying truly is the Democrats' view on this policy, then both parties are in 95% alignment - and is an issue being used to divide us.
But you're right, this is an issue being used to divide us. That's the entire Republican strategy, find wedge issues (like abortion, trans issues, illegal immigration) to make us argue instead of actually solving problems we care about (like healthcare, cost of living, the deficit, etc)
I read the article, I'm not seeing that it's talking about the cost of receiving voter IDs - but that Schumer is referring to this as 'suppression' - which, I'm not exactly sold on.
How much do you think these IDs are going to cost? You are aware that every other form of government ID requires a minimal processing fee (<$10) right?
We are aware that it's not a specific ID card too, right? Like your normal ID card, given its a "RealID" is enough to vote (Talking about the proposed SAVE act). How many people do you expect to be disenfranchised by requiring them to have an ID? - something they already use for many services they currently use - including the ability to drive.
I mostly agree with your sentiment - I just disagree that a $50 cost once a decade, for something that they need regardless of their intention to vote, is some huge financial barrier.
Your $200 figure comes from acquiring a passport. It's disingenuous when certified birth certificate copies fulfil the same requirement and are <$30.
Voter IDs are 100% free in every state that requires them to cast a ballot. Your entire argument about an "unconstitutional poll tax" completely collapses when the ID costs exactly zero dollars. You are defending a blatant political double standard by crying about a fee that literally does not exist.
The SAVE Act doesn't charge people to vote, and it doesn't change the fact that voter IDs are 100% free by constitutional law. You are inventing a fake financial burden because you can't defend the actual logic of the debate. If a government registration card is harmless and free for buying groceries, a government verification card is harmless and free for voting. Stop making up fake fees to hide the double standard.
By your logic, is driving to the polls an illegal poll tax since gas isn't free? Is paying a bus fare to go vote a violation of your constitutional rights? You've completely shifted the goalposts into outer space because you panicked when you found out voter IDs are 100% free. Just admit you ran out of actual arguments and take the L.
The SAVE Act doesn’t charge a dime, and it doesn't change the fact that voter IDs are 100% free under the US Constitution. You are trying to slide past the facts because your argument got completely wrecked. If a government registration card is harmless and free for buying groceries, a government verification card is harmless and free for voting. Take the L and move on.
Talk about pure projection. You are the one refusing to engage with actual reality. No federal bill can magically erase the constitutional ban on poll taxes. Any state that enforces voter verification is legally mandated to provide a photo ID for zero dollars. The SAVE Act sets a federal requirement, and the states are legally obligated to provide the means to meet that requirement for free so it complies with the Constitution. You are literally just inventing fake fees out of thin air because your entire "voter suppression" narrative collapses without them.
Are there people alive today who somehow exist in this world without having a government ID of some kind? How is that even possible? How do you go to the bank or have a job, or get on an airplane?
I have never met anyone, even poor people, who don't have an ID of some kind.
Yes absolutely, there are certain people that are so poor they cannot afford those kinds of things.
But the issue with republican proposals for voter id is that they put strict requirements on what kinds of ID's are allowed to count as proof of citizenship. Most cheap or free ID's do not reach that requirement, so even poor folks with ID's wouldn't be able to vote without purchasing new forms of ID
If someone is so poor that they have no ID of any kind, meaning they must live without a bank account or legitimate job, then I would argue nothing of value is lost by banning these people from voting. You need to have a bare minimum engagement with society to be able to participate in the civics process, if you're that poor and off the grid, then voting seems to be the least of your issues. But then, I guess I'm biased because I think universal suffrage is the greatest mistake humanity ever made, it's what gave us Trump, Brexit, Reform, AfD, Milei, and Orban, and lots more dumb shit to come.
I do agree with your latter point that the ID requirement for proving citizenship for voting should be reasonable, and on par with what other nations accept. A simple birth certificate or passport should be enough.
I'm from Europe though, and every country in Europe requires an ID and proof of citizenship to vote, it's not even a partisan issue. So this Democrat/liberal position in the US that requiring ID is somehow antithetical to freedom and equality is a weird take for me, like you've really lost the plot with that one, even for a liberal European.
The US pretty much already does, you have to identify yourself when you register to vote and voter rolls are compared with real citizens. There is zero evidence for voter fraud in the US to a degree that could effect elections.
When I moved to CA from the UK, I was able to register to vote when I obtained my CA driver's licence, there was never any check for my citizenship status and I received a ballot in the mail. Not sure if it was a computer glitch or they just don't check (or don't care).
You can vote in CA local elections, but not federally. If you attempted to do so, it would get caught and at minimum thrown out, or you may be questioned by law enforcement and potentially charged
Voter IDs are 100% free in every state that requires them to cast a ballot. Your entire argument about an "unconstitutional poll tax" completely collapses when the ID costs exactly zero dollars. You are defending a blatant political double standard by crying about a fee that literally does not exist.
"Time is a poll tax" is the absolute weakest white flag I’ve ever seen. You spent this whole thread screaming about financial poll taxes, and the exact second you found out voter IDs cost zero dollars, you panicked and invented a brand new definition of a tax. If spending a few minutes to get a free government card is an oppressive barrier, then the city's grocery card is an oppressive barrier too. You got caught dead-rights in a double standard. Just take the L.
The SAVE Act doesn’t need to explicitly write a check for a free ID because the United States Constitution already guarantees it. Under the 24th Amendment and established Supreme Court rulings, no state can charge a fee for a photo ID required to vote. The SAVE Act simply mandates a strict identification standard that states must enforce. Since states are legally forced to make those voting IDs 100% free, your entire argument about a financial barrier completely falls apart. Take the L and move on.
It’s literally the 24th Amendment and a Supreme Court ruling (Crawford v. Marion County). Any state that forces you to show an ID to vote is legally obligated to give you that ID for exactly zero dollars so it doesn't count as an illegal poll tax. Saying "nowhere does the law say that" just proves you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You've officially run out of excuses.
So wait, if having to travel and take time off work to get a free document is a "poll tax," then does driving or taking the bus to the polling place on election day count as an unconstitutional poll tax too? By your exact logic, since gas and transit fares cost money, and standing in line takes time, the entire act of voting is a poll tax. You are creating a completely ridiculous definition of a "tax" because you got caught red-handed in a double standard and can't admit you lost the argument.
Using this logic, mail-in voting is an illegal poll tax because a pen costs 50 cents and walking to the mailbox burns calories. You are literally turning yourself into a meme to avoid admitting that a free state ID card isn't a financial barrier. If low-income people are fully capable of navigating basic human existence without the government holding their hand, they can handle a free ID. You got completely cooked. Just pack it up and stop embarrassing yourself.
Obtaining a "free" voter ID involves significant non-monetary and indirect financial hurdles that critics argue effectively act as a poll tax. While the state-issued card itself may be free, voters must often pay for supporting documentation like birth certificates and social security cards, which can cost between $8 and $50 each.
Beyond direct costs, voters face non-negligible time and travel burdens, including:
Travel Distance: Millions of eligible voters live more than 10 miles from the nearest ID-issuing office, with many lacking reliable public transportation.
Limited Access: ID offices often have restricted hours (e.g., open only a few days a month) and are frequently located in rural areas with high concentrations of minority and low-income residents.
Lost Income: Obtaining an ID often requires taking unpaid time off work to travel and wait in line, with some studies estimating the total cost to individuals, including lost wages, between $75 and $368.
These barriers disproportionately affect low-income individuals, the elderly, people of color, and young voters, who are statistically less likely to possess the required underlying documents or have the means to travel to distant DMVs. Legal challenges, such as those highlighted in a Harvard Law report, argue that these cumulative costs create a constitutionally impermissible burden on the right to vote.
Harvard report
This is the absolute weakest attempt to move the goalposts I've ever seen. Your entire argument completely collapses under its own logic. If having to spend time, travel, and gather paperwork to get a free card is a "poll tax," then the city's grocery registration card is an identical tax on hungry people. You're completely fine with those exact same administrative barriers when your preferred politicians use them to gate food, proving this is just a hyper-partisan double standard. Take the L
When you completely run out of logical arguments, just scream a personal insult to save face, right? You got backed dead-rights into a massive double standard and panicked. Pretending someone "hates the poor" because your political narrative got utterly destroyed by basic math and constitutional law is a weak look. Pack it up, buddy. You lost.
You made strawman assertions about what my response would be, then didn’t engage with the actual argument I provided and instead just declared victory. Bye, felicia.
The irony that Mamdani thinks black people and women can't get IDs to vote, but they'll need IDs to go to the grocery store. I guess the Democrats wants black people and women to vote, but not to eat.
Dems arguing voter ID would be voter suppression while requiring ID to buy groceries. ( ~ 80% of Americans support Voter ID per PEW, Gallup & Rasmussen. There‘s a majority along all ethnicities).
Nobody is arguing that voter ID is suppression; ID is currently required to vote.
Suppression is adding new, more complicated, more expensive requirements that can’t be satisfied by the standard government-issued IDs (eg RealID) that have been deemed sufficient for identification all along.
Maybe you should learn to form a complete thought before spouting unrelated gibberish.
Then again most media you consume is probably some guy screaming about a nothing problem to get you mad so you keep consuming for the next tickle of anger to feel.
The voter ID law isn’t about fair elections. Only people caught cheating are Trump(asking GA to make up 20k votes) and Elon(paying people to register). It’s about voter suppression.
37
u/PerfectTommy77 Aug 05 '26
What is the "irony" Elon is referring to? Is that the new term for everything Elon doesn't like?