Serious question here because I'm not sure. We can assume that any type of one person/one vote system would never be considered fair to them. The obvious reason why is that when their leader lost an election he opted for criminally trying to overturn the results to stay in power and then actual violence to stay in power. But it's not just him, all over the country republicans tirelessly work to limit who can vote and they specifically try to dilute the vote of anybody who doesn't agree with them. In Texas they accept gun registration cards and an acceptable voter ID but not student IDs. In Georgia they've limited early voting and specifically limited it on Sundays when Black people tend to vote early after going to church. All over the country you see massive lines to vote because polling places in Democratic areas are closed while republican areas tend to have much shorter lines.
So what do they want? I honestly don't think they want a flat-out dictatorship because the optics are so bad. I feel like their realistic goal is some sort of apartheid system where they'd have votes but the weight of votes would be different depending on who is casting them. We always hear that there is so much corruption in big cities (ie, Black people cheat) so they'd want to somehow marginalize those votes even more than the Electoral College already does. I'd also imagine they'd be fine with going back to poll taxes and land ownership as other conditions.
I can't think of an argument any GQPer could give that would convince me they're pro-democracy since at this point they only agree with election results if they win.
So what do they want? I honestly don't think they want a flat-out dictatorship because the optics are so bad. I feel like their realistic goal is some sort of apartheid system where they'd have votes but the weight of votes would be different depending on who is casting them. We always hear that there is so much corruption in big cities (ie, Black people cheat) so they'd want to somehow marginalize those votes even more than the Electoral College already does. I'd also imagine they'd be fine with going back to poll taxes and land ownership as other conditions.
I can't think of an argument any GQPer could give that would convince me they're pro-democracy since at this point they only agree with election results if they win.
