It is becoming clear that much of the stakes of the November contest will revolve around questions of gender – and specifically, questions of family
“It’s possible,” writes Jessica Winter in the New Yorker, “that if JD Vance had his way, citizenship in the United States would be conferred not solely by birthright but by marriage and children.” This is no exaggeration. In a now viral 2021 clip, JD Vance said: “Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children. When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power – you should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic – than people who don’t have kids. Let’s face the consequences and the reality: If you don’t have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn’t get nearly the same voice.”
This position now represents large swaths of the Republican party, which has taken on an angry and aggressively prescriptive approach to family life.
If you don’t have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn’t get nearly the same voice.”
Then we should put a cap on the voting age too, right?
Or those who just live for the afterlife?
Someone remind them of all the welfare moms who would just vote themselves a big chunk of your tax dollars in between squeezing out brats.
Obviously, that whole thing was a total distortion in the 80’s and I do not endorse that point of view, but I’ll bet if right wing boomers were reminded by someone on their team they’d be scared shitless.
Zero percent chance they don’t think the family patriarch (or divorced patriarch as the case may be) ought to be the one casting their children’s votes.
Well, maybe it would force him to explain that. Just make them say the weirdest policy shit imaginable. Maybe we could make it all weird enough to drive away the non-maga crowd.
The irony is that right-wing boomer suburban homeowners are the real “welfare queens,” and are subsidized by the urban apartment-dwelling single moms.
JD Vance isn’t running for mayor though. Property taxes are a local issue. At the federal level the situation is reversed. Bigger families mean more income taxpayers. Nuclear families tend to produce wealthier and more educated offspring than single moms.
Oh dear, I remember all of the “latchkey kids” and how horrible it was that moms worked instead of being at home with their children. If the Republicans actually cared, they would have put in support systems back in the 1980s when it became clear where things were heading.
Just a somewhat related note, it clued in to me they say “family values” because they can no longer say “Christian values”.
I think that’s always been a dogwhistle for Christians anyway.
Hrmmm… given their other policy stances I assume that means if I and a buddy freeze a bunch of fertilized eggs we can vote for each one of them?
Will I be able to marry my couch?
As long as your couch is not the same sex as you are…
As 10 lb. 10 oz. baby Jesus wanted it.
As hilarious as the couch stuff(ing) is, this guy’s policy positions fill me with violent rage.
Imagine how the monkeys felt as their balls singed.
Is that a new JD Vance meme I’m not yet privy to?
- good luck on that constitutional amendment that won’t ever get passed
- this is pretty transparently a Nationalist Christian “go forth and be fruitful, but only if you’re white” ploy. They’re trying to turn the US into an ethnostate.
Quick note: the US has yet to transition out of being an ethnostate since its foundation. When they say they’re anti-woke, what they’re really saying is they’re pro-apartheid
This doesn’t surprise me. I remember being told when I was about 22 that I was a terrible person for not having children. It was, you see, irresponsible of me because I should be planning for the future and for who would take care of me. Instead, it turns out, that I’m an awful, awful human being because I will eventually become a drain on resources.
Under his eye
…liner
This will last exactly until they realize that in the US Black and Hispanic families have, on average, roughly twice the number of children as white families according to the Pew Research Center. The only racial demographic having less children than white people is Asian-Americans, and it’s basically a statistical tie between those two demos.
It would be hilarious if democrats were like… well, ok, if you insist.
I’m sure the Musks, Kochs, and Theils of the world will be super excited about giving poor people more voting power. /s
https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/
I feel like 200k is a very low cutoff. It’s probably based on some plan Elon and Peter came up with for adopting or birthing 100k babies and making the government pay for them all
So if the reasoning behind this is that parents deserve to have their votes weighted heavier because they have a bigger stake in the country’s future, shouldn’t Evangelicals who sincerely believe we are living in the end times get less weight than anyone?
I am medically incapable of inseminating a woman because I am sterile.
And JD Vance thinks I would need what … to prove that so that I could have a ballot ? Or is he saying that biologically I am not allowed in democracy ?
Or does Vance think that adopting confers voting rights ? Can someone in a small town adopt 300 children and win an mayoral election ?
Vance thinks you’re not going to vote the way he wants you to so you shouldn’t be allowed to.
Keep in mind they only want “traditional” families and consistently try to block LGBTQ+ from adopting.
If you don’t have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn’t get nearly the same voice.
I fully support this.
I want to see America progress into the future, therefore my vote should matter more than those who want to return America to the past, right?
Anyone over 65 only gets half a vote because they’re gonna die soon.
