Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Flatline2962 t1_ixfc02f wrote

Reply to comment by countrygrmmrhotshit in Republicans ask Georgia high court to halt Saturday voting in US Senate runoff | CNN Politics by irkli

Let's go to one of the fathers of modern conservatism, Paul Weyrich, co-founder of the Heritage Foundation:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw

"As a matter of fact our leverage in the elections goes up as the voting populace goes down"

Seems pretty straight forward. That was 42 years ago and nothing has changed since.

298

countrygrmmrhotshit t1_ixfd54j wrote

Pretty soon they’ll say “the constitution originally allowed only white, landowning males to vote and we believe in the founding fathers vision”

135

Toaster_bath13 t1_ixfebwa wrote

Only landowners can vote.

Only white men can own land.

Voting not racist now right? /s

83

CasperWithAJ t1_ixicoow wrote

I’d bet anything that KKKlarance Thomas would vote for this

4

pegothejerk t1_ixfidh6 wrote

Fun fact - there were women who could vote before women's suffrage and the 19th was passed, but they were granted that ability from inheriting large estates and sociatal standings, and those women almost never wanted women in general to get the right to vote because they feared changing society would cause them to lose their standing in society and their comforts at home. Women like that were also largely responsible for fighting against women's suffrage, just as there are minorities and women today voting with conservatives against their own interests.

62

Deyln t1_ixfn0ep wrote

And estate and inheritance is also one of the larger factors for the definition and adoption of the concept of gender.

14

GozerDGozerian t1_ixgsp2k wrote

Can you explain this a bit more?

5

Deyln t1_ixgyubk wrote

https://debuk.wordpress.com/2016/12/15/a-brief-history-of-gender/

−1

D00M_H4MM3R t1_ixhsp7d wrote

The words “inheritance” and “estate” are not used in that article. It is indeed quite lengthy, but has nothing to do with the point you made above.

2

InsuranceToTheRescue t1_ixhloi9 wrote

I believe it also depended on the time and place. Like, Wyoming almost passed on becoming a state because Congress was against them having universal suffrage in their state constitution; they put it in anyways. New Jersey had women's suffrage based on the same criteria as men, needing to own X amount in cash or property, but that was taken away in 1807.

2

Chasman1965 t1_ixfzc1o wrote

The US Constitution never said such a thing. States determined the qualifications for voting. Amendments to the Constitution changed it so the states couldn't block people from voting because they were black, female or under 21.

6

sonoma4life t1_ixg7uq0 wrote

i've never met a conservative that doesn't have ideas on limiting voting.

43

DonnieJuniorsEmails t1_ixggwg2 wrote

and it all boils down to the same bullshit:

"They won't vote for my platform to hate and attack them, so they shouldn't be allowed to vote at all".

32

shank1093 t1_ixhz5ls wrote

Like trying to raise the voting age 🙄😡 And if they did, then its: You can enlist and fight/defend/support/die for your country (government), but you can't vote (or have a say) in how it's run. GTFO!

8

dybyj t1_ixi13w9 wrote

My friends describe me as a conservative democrat(?) even though I’m not a democrat… so hi?

0

Kramereng t1_ixjod6d wrote

Neoconservative, Bill Kristol, had somewhat similar thoughts, saying:

> "If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.

1