PAGOP Calls Dems on DNC Photo ID Rule

Democrats representing Pennsylvania at the Democratic National Convention have spent a great deal of time criticizing the state’s new voter ID law. But as the PA Republican Party notes, Dems are enforcing their own ID policy in Charlotte.

“The fact that the Pennsylvania Democrats are requiring photo ID to pick up credentials at its own convention is the height of hypocrisy,” said Chairman Rob Gleason. “The sensational arguments that Democrats have been making against Voter ID simply lose all credibility in this one Twitter photo [above].”

Some of the more sensational arguments that Democrats have made include allegations that the voter ID law is a scheme to deliberately suppress minority votes. Some of the less sensational arguments include references to the number of cases of voter impersonation in PA in the past decade (zero).

The picture was posted by Salena Zito of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

“It is hard to fathom that Democrats are more concerned about protecting their convention than protecting the integrity of Pennsylvania’s election but the fact they implemented their own ‘Voter ID’ in Charlotte proves it” Gleason continued.

PA Dems spokesman Mark Nicastre said the comparison was invalid, and dinged the PAGOP over news that two high-profile Republican-favoring super PACs have decided to pull out of Pennsylvania.

“Voting is a fundamental right, and the failure of the Pennsylvania Republican Party to comprehend the flaws of their attempted analogy provides a pretty good window into why conservative super PACs aren’t willing to invest in Pennsylvania Republicans,” he said.

The state’s voter ID law was upheld in the PA Commonwealth Court last month, and next week heads to the PA Supreme Court for its appeal. In the meantime, the state has unveiled various efforts aimed at providing IDs at no cost to those who don’t have them.

18 Responses

  1. The only thing more rediculous and disgraceful than the Republicans comments was your decision to legitamize it by printing it. Shame on them, but I expect no better. Shame on you becuase you know better.

  2. I don’t know if stricter ID laws are necessary at the polls but any reasonable person can see the GOP’s actions were aimed at curtailing potential Democrat voters.

  3. Tim Potts is absolutely correct. I was there. And those recognizable delegates were ot asked for ID. But protecting the President was the most important objective

  4. Democrats are checking IDs as a solution to the problem of uninvited/unexpected guests who attempt to get into the convention. Republicans are creating a voter suppression problem by imagining a voter fraud problem.

  5. I don’t care what convention it is, if the President of the United States is going to be there, Secret Service would be derelict in its duty if it did not demand whatever identificationn is necessary to protect the President.

  6. Good point Mary. In fact, voting was restricted by land ownership, race and gender.

    John Adams, signer of the Declaration of Independence and later president, wrote in 1776 that no good could come from enfranchising more Americans:

    Depend upon it, Sir, it is dangerous to open so fruitful a source of controversy and altercation as would be opened by attempting to alter the qualifications of voters; there will be no end to it. New claims will arise; women will demand the vote; lads from 12 to 21 will think their rights not enough attended to; and every man who has not a farthing, will demand an equal voice with any other, in all acts of state. It tends to confound and destroy all distinctions, and prostrate all ranks to one common level.

    So Tom the founding fathers were a lot more restrictive than simply requiring a voter to prove their identity. One could make the argument that they would have indeed required photo ID, had it existed in 1776.

    Personally, I have to show my ID for everything else, so why not to vote. In fact, last election, I was asked for my ID by an official that had known me for over 20 years. I felt neither insulted nor disenfranchised.

  7. So…..owning a gun is constitutional right, as is carrying one concealed….do liberals like David Diano think we should repeal all provisions requiring one to show photo id to get a gun or a concealed carry permit??????

  8. Tom, really? My understanding was that someone had to own property to be allowed to vote. I do not believe that the Founding Fathers were on board for complete lack of accountability in the area.

  9. Why isn’t the GOP paying attention to the founding fathers about Voter ID?

    Benjamin Franklin stated, “it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer”.

    So should we stop thousands from lawfully voting to go after the illegal voters (of which there is no proof that they exist and if they do exist it is in a much smaller number than the amount of people disenfranchised from the vote through Voter ID.)

  10. I think the presence of the Secret Service might have something to do with a desire to check for IDs.

    However, I strongly suspect that ID was not checked for anyone recognized by sight, unlike the PA law which prevents you from identifying your own mother or own child without a state issued ID.

  11. I love how the libtards on here are trying
    to say this does not count. It never counts
    when you use logic with libtards. It is just
    as funny as having an ex pervert President
    “Bill Clinton” Following a fellow Democrat
    on stage at the DNC. That wants free birth

  12. It doesn’t matter that voting is a right and attending a convention is not. That is a separate legal issue that is being addressed by the courts. The point is that requiring a photo ID serves the legitimate purpose of ensuring that those in attendance are the people whom they claim to be. It is entirely reasonable for the Republicans to call the Dems out on their claims that it is irrational to require photo ID if there is no documented problem of impersonation. The Dems’ requirement of a photo ID — even if no one has ever demonstrably impersonated Dem to gain admission to a convention — shows that it is a reasonable precaution to take.

  13. The notion that attending a party convention and voting fall into the same category of “rights” in the United States is way off base. The bottom line is that the right to vote is guaranteed in the US Constitution and is not contingent on anything other than the person being a US citizen and over 18 years of age. For the PAGOP to try to link the two situations and put them on the same level is fundamentally wrong.

  14. The sign doesn’t say “State issued photo ID”, and I’m sure an expired drivers license or a teacher’s ID card would be accepted (unlike in PA).

    Also, I’m pretty sure that Bob Casey and Michael Nutter didn’t have to show their ID.

Comments are closed.

  • Reader Poll: Have You Requested a Mail-In Ballot?

    • Yes. I enjoy mail-in voting. (50%)
    • No. I am going to the poll. (50%)

    Total Voters: 121

    Loading ... Loading ...
Continue to Browser


To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen