Skip to content

Ann Coulter on Particular Suffrage: 2001, 2003, and 2007

2022-12-08

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018/11/10

Ann Coulter, conservative writer, author, and public commentator, over the 2000s spoke on the issue of universal suffrage or the right to vote.

In the core of the statements by Coulter, the foci remain the young, women, and, in particular, single women, because these demographics vote Democrat rather than Republican.

Much conservative thought incorporates zero-sum thought. The notion of a loss experienced or felt with the inclusion of non-group members, e.g., Democrats or associated statistical voting blocks, becoming active in politics.

Coulter mused, in a consistent manner, on the right to vote for the young or women. However, the focus here remains the vote of women. In particular, the quotes, gathered through Wikiquote, between February, 2001 and October 2007.

Take, for example, the first instance from the now-defunct show Politically Incorrect hosted by Bill Maher:

I think [women] should be armed but should not vote … women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it … it’s always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care. (Politically Incorrect 26 February 2001)

Less than 100 years after women earned the right to vote in the United States, sectors of society may not see this as much of a joke as a call to action.

Similarly, some religious leaders may make the call for violence against women, which some see as comical, others as dismissible, and still others see as a call to action to keep women from becoming independent of their control.

Important to note, a significant following of the Republican Party, now, is fundamentalist Evangelical Christianity, which links to the base of Coulter. These individuals believe in the right to vote for themselves but not for opposition; thus, these constituents do not believe in democracy.

Indeed, as with the religious incursion on reproductive rights and other human rights-political issues, the religious innervation begins to erode in principle and practice the separation of a place of worship and state and, therefore, by default self-defines (them) as theocratic and anti-democratic.

The second example is here:

It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 — except Goldwater in ’64 — the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted. (The Guardian 17 May 2003)

Some see her as a joke. But others see her as making a call to action. With the mobilized fundamentalist community, they see the culture secularising as a culture war. In fact, a cosmic battle between Good and Evil.

There are a number of issues like it. But this rhetoric appeals to the Evangelical base of the Republican Party now.

There are plenty of White Evangelicals that fight for women in the home, having lots of babies early, marrying early, not being in the political life, not to speak out for their rights, and so on. That country is truly divided now.

Coulter speaks for one base, often white, Christian, married, well-to-do, Evangelical, and Republican men and women. It shows in the voting patterns too.

Uneducated married white women voted for Trump. Black women, educated women, and single white women did not (as much). Since 2001 to, at last, 2007, Coulter has been consistent on this point.

This may become a clarion call to some of the base, as with some cultural commentators questioning the ability of men and women to work together. Last word to Coulter:

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. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.

(interview with New York Observer 2007–10–02, quoted in “Coulter: “If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president””, Media Matters for America, 4 October 2007)

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: