The aristocrat-class anti-suffragists who held the economic interest position were the most influential because they allied with one another as a political force to inhibit the suffragists success. Moreover, they skillfully developed tactics and took the necessary actions to combat the suffragists. These anti-suffragists extended their political circle around the nation by organizing into groups and collecting sympathizers among the immigrant-laboring class, who were nearly shunned by the suffragists. The aristocrat-class were the most influential because they made advancements to be equitable to the suffragists, unlike the ordinary anti-suffragists and the progressive American women. They were persistent in their intention to inhibit the suffragists. …show more content…
This is supported by the fact that even the aristocrat-class women anti-suffragists began to take the actions that they discouraged. For instance, the act of being a political activist was considered unfeminine by these ordinary anti-suffragists. They were successful in garnering traditional supporters by using literal and visual rhetoric's. But their actions stopped there. They were not as influential as the aristocrats because they did not attempt to inhibit the political developments of the suffragists. This is also the reason why the progressive American women were not as influential. They did take actions by creating literal rhetoric's but their arguments lacked the political momentum that the aristocrat-class suffrage opponents were able to use to gain supporters. Moreover, their rhetoric's did not have a large-body of audience, thus, they were not able to create a strong support system against the