Posted on 05/29/2008 1:43:56 PM PDT by neverdem
"If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. It's kind of a pipe dream, it's a personal fantasy of mine, but I don't think it's going to happen."
—Ann Coulter, Oct. 2 New York Observer
With Hillary Clinton still the leading Democrat in the race for president, a lot of news stories over the next year will discuss women voting patterns. Some women may well vote for Mrs. Clinton, even if they disagree with her policies, simply because she is a woman. Terms like "historic" will be thrown around a lot, but Mrs. Clinton's run really just represents a continuation of a trend that started about a hundred years ago, when women started voting in large numbers.
In fact, if you believe all the academic research that...
--snip--
Fortunately, there was a unique aspect of women's suffrage that allows us to answer this question: Of the 19 states that had not passed women's suffrage before the approval of the 19th Amendment, nine approved the amendment, while the other 12 had suffrage imposed on them. If some unknown factor caused both a desire for larger government and women's suffrage, then government should have only grown in states that voluntarily adopted suffrage. This, however, is not the case: After approving women's suffrage, a similar growth in government was seen in both groups of states.
--snip--
Women's suffrage ushered in a sea change in American politics that affected policies aside from taxes and the size of government. For example, states that granted suffrage were much more likely to pass Prohibition, for the temperance movement was largely dominated by middle-class women. Although the "gender gap" is commonly thought to have arisen only in the 1960s, female voting dramatically changed American politics from the very beginning.
(Excerpt) Read more at cache.search.yahoo-ht2.akadns.net ...
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.”
Amen, and amen.
The idea is in John Lott’s book “Freedomnomics”, chapter 5 pg 160 in the hardback edition.
Of course I support women’s right to vote, but it does seem to have led the country leftward.
And here’s a woman who agrees with you wholeheartedly. Or is I agree with you and Ann Coulter...
There are more solutions, other than taking their vote away, to the problem that women tend to vote in favor of government protections. Can you think of one?
I’d give up my right to vote if they’d take it away from ALL women and cut the size of government by at least 50%! No more shrill speeches!
Based on your sound judgement, I think you should keep your right to vote.
We’ll just take it away from the other women.
The underlying reason, as I see it, is that generally, women are more willing than men to trade freedom away for security.
"If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. It's kind of a pipe dream, it's a personal fantasy of mine, but I don't think it's going to happen."
No Ann, it just means you get a different kind of Democrat Party.
Liberal women will always take away your liberty and your money for their security.
Always.
Guaranteed.
Thanks for the link. There’s something weird about that cached link that I found.
Since the time the 19th Amendment was passed, we have had NO president with facial hair (which had been the norm prior to Wilson.)
Women gave us 8 years of Bill Clinton and soon, 8 years of Hillary!
yw
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.