Vance says the Democrats are "anti-family and anti-children,"

frigidweirdo

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
55,083
Reaction score
15,242
Points
2,180

""This is about criticising the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-children," he told .

"The simple point that I made is that having children, becoming a father, becoming a mother, I really do think it changes your perspective in a pretty profound way," he said.

"I'm making an argument that our entire society has become sceptical and even hateful towards the idea of having kids.""

How is the Democratic Party "anti-family" and "anti-children"???


Let's look at facts.

The states with the least amount of social workers per children is Utah, 623 children per social worker. Idaho, Arkansas, Georgia and New Jersey are the other high ones. Louisiana doesn't even get on this, probably because it's so bad the state doesn't send data.

So two out of four are strong right wing states, one a left wing state and one a more right wing than left wing state. The liberal north east has the most.


Single parent families.

DC has the highest. Then Mississippi, then Louisiana, Ohio is pretty high up there, Mr Vance.

Basically he claims Democrats are against families, but it's not really true. The Republicans seem to push for the ideal family and people feel they can't reach that, and it causes problems. Democrats are more honest about it, and therefore might have less problems.

Obviously this isn't black and white. There are many issues, like urban v. rural and the like, but for a guy who wrote a book about HOW BAD HIS HILLBILLY PEOPLE ARE AT MARRIAGE, to say Republicans support marriage and children more than Democrats just doesn't pass the test of FACTS.
 

""This is about criticising the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-children," he told .

"The simple point that I made is that having children, becoming a father, becoming a mother, I really do think it changes your perspective in a pretty profound way," he said.

"I'm making an argument that our entire society has become sceptical and even hateful towards the idea of having kids.""

How is the Democratic Party "anti-family" and "anti-children"???


Let's look at facts.

The states with the least amount of social workers per children is Utah, 623 children per social worker. Idaho, Arkansas, Georgia and New Jersey are the other high ones. Louisiana doesn't even get on this, probably because it's so bad the state doesn't send data.

So two out of four are strong right wing states, one a left wing state and one a more right wing than left wing state. The liberal north east has the most.


Single parent families.

DC has the highest. Then Mississippi, then Louisiana, Ohio is pretty high up there, Mr Vance.

Basically he claims Democrats are against families, but it's not really true. The Republicans seem to push for the ideal family and people feel they can't reach that, and it causes problems. Democrats are more honest about it, and therefore might have less problems.

Obviously this isn't black and white. There are many issues, like urban v. rural and the like, but for a guy who wrote a book about HOW BAD HIS HILLBILLY PEOPLE ARE AT MARRIAGE, to say Republicans support marriage and children more than Democrats just doesn't pass the test of FACTS.
Leftists only care about one thing, and that is decreasing human population levels to help preserve their precious natural resources and reduce carbon emissions. In fact, Biden passed inflation legislation that was mostly spending to help combat climate change, something he later admitted. Yea, the legislation had really nothing to do about inflation. Funny that. But such insane spending on climate change is not enough, it is never enough, as they want to spend trillions and trillions more. Problem is, all that spending produces, you guessed it, more inflation.

Also look at the policies of the DNC. They are all about such things as abortion and gender confusion, both of which helps reduce population levels. And why are they not more concerned about drugs pouring across the border that kill about 300 Americans a day? Once again, it helps reduce population levels. If you look at government policy through this Lense, their policies make a whole lot more sense than they would otherwise. It is just like China and their one child policy, Leftists around the world are consumed with this one thought, which is there are too many people. Is this also why the US seems to enjoy funding wars across the globe spending money on both sides of the conflict? You tell me.

The greatest resource any nation has are it's children. Therefore, when it's leaders fail to recognize this fact, they unknowingly promote the demise of that country.

1722334603179.png
 
Leftists only care about one thing, and that is decreasing human population levels to help preserve their precious natural resources and reduce carbon emissions. In fact, Biden passed inflation legislation that was mostly spending to help combat climate change, something he later admitted. Yea, the legislation had really nothing to do about inflation. Funny that. But such insane spending on climate change is not enough, it is never enough, as they want to spend trillions and trillions more. Problem is, all that spending produces, you guessed it, more inflation.

Also look at the policies of the DNC. They are all about such things as abortion and gender confusion, both of which helps reduce population levels. And why are they not more concerned about drugs pouring across the border that kill about 300 Americans a day? Once again, it helps reduce population levels. If you look at government policy through this Lense, their policies make a whole lot more sense than they would otherwise. It is just like China and their one child policy, Leftists around the world are consumed with this one thought, which is there are too many people. Is this also why the US seems to enjoy funding wars across the globe spending money on both sides of the conflict? You tell me.

The greatest resource any nation has are it's children. Therefore, when it's leaders fail to recognize this fact, they unknowingly promote the demise of that country.

View attachment 986767
What's confusing to you you dumb Bingo? We don't fine eagles who break their own eggs do we?
 
"This is about criticising the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-children," he told . "The simple point that I made is that having children, becoming a father, becoming a mother, I really do think it changes your perspective in a pretty profound way," he said. "I'm making an argument that our entire society has become skeptical and even hateful towards the idea of having kids." How is the Democratic Party "anti-family" and "anti-children"???

Let's look at facts.

The states with the least amount of social workers per children is Utah, 623 children per social worker. Idaho, Arkansas, Georgia and New Jersey are the other high ones. Louisiana doesn't even get on this, probably because it's so bad the state doesn't send data.
So two out of four are strong right wing states, one a left wing state and one a more right wing than left wing state. The liberal north east has the most.

Single parent families.
DC has the highest. Then Mississippi, then Louisiana, Ohio is pretty high up there, Mr Vance.

Basically he claims Democrats are against families, but it's not really true. The Republicans seem to push for the ideal family and people feel they can't reach that, and it causes problems. Democrats are more honest about it, and therefore might have less problems.

Obviously this isn't black and white. There are many issues, like urban v. rural and the like, but for a guy who wrote a book about HOW BAD HIS HILLBILLY PEOPLE ARE AT MARRIAGE, to say Republicans support marriage and children more than Democrats just doesn't pass the test of FACTS.
1. Democrats promote abortion more than family values. Promoting the gay agenda is not pro-family or pro-children.

2. Kids per social worker isn't a measure of parenting. The rate of kids in foster care is probably a better metric.

3. Single parent families is a very important metric. Having two parents is the best indicator of success for kids. That DC is the worst is no surprise, 99% democrat and mostly black.

4. Democrats v Republicans in family units with both a father and mother would be the best metric. Same metric by race too.
 

""This is about criticising the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-children," he told .

"The simple point that I made is that having children, becoming a father, becoming a mother, I really do think it changes your perspective in a pretty profound way," he said.

"I'm making an argument that our entire society has become sceptical and even hateful towards the idea of having kids.""

How is the Democratic Party "anti-family" and "anti-children"???


Let's look at facts.

The states with the least amount of social workers per children is Utah, 623 children per social worker. Idaho, Arkansas, Georgia and New Jersey are the other high ones. Louisiana doesn't even get on this, probably because it's so bad the state doesn't send data.

So two out of four are strong right wing states, one a left wing state and one a more right wing than left wing state. The liberal north east has the most.


Single parent families.

DC has the highest. Then Mississippi, then Louisiana, Ohio is pretty high up there, Mr Vance.

Basically he claims Democrats are against families, but it's not really true. The Republicans seem to push for the ideal family and people feel they can't reach that, and it causes problems. Democrats are more honest about it, and therefore might have less problems.

Obviously this isn't black and white. There are many issues, like urban v. rural and the like, but for a guy who wrote a book about HOW BAD HIS HILLBILLY PEOPLE ARE AT MARRIAGE, to say Republicans support marriage and children more than Democrats just doesn't pass the test of FACTS.

Vance sounds horribly immature to me.
 
1. Democrats promote abortion more than family values. Promoting the gay agenda is not pro-family or pro-children.

2. Kids per social worker isn't a measure of parenting. The rate of kids in foster care is probably a better metric.

3. Single parent families is a very important metric. Having two parents is the best indicator of success for kids. That DC is the worst is no surprise, 99% democrat and mostly black.

4. Democrats v Republicans in family units with both a father and mother would be the best metric. Same metric by race too.

Gay people can have families too.

Democrats allow abortion for those who want it. Sometimes abortion makes for better families in the long run, especially when it's people who aren't mature enough to look after kids or have a family.

No, kids per social worker isn't a great measure, I went looking for child abuse per state and realized that the stats would only include those the state decide were subjected to child abuse which would vary state to state. So a state might have high child abuse because they state doesn't take it seriously, but report really low levels of child abuse because they just don't find the abuse that is happening.

So, I went with one statistic that is more concrete, something that says more.

Really it's hard to know which states give abused kids a better chance, which states stop abuse before it starts, but you can bet Louisiana and Mississippi would be at the bottom of any list were there one.

Single parent families are a problem, and DC is at the top, and then two Republican states 2nd and 3rd. A lot of Republican states do worse than democratic states, but again, not black and white.

So, overall there are certain states, Mississippi and Louisiana at the top, that are ******* awful for the family, states in the north east probably the best, and then it depends what happens in between.


Here, it's basically a list of right wing states, at 13 is Rhode Island which is the first (aside from DC) which is a proper left wing state.
 
Vance sounds horribly immature to me.

I think he seems to be a guy in conflict. On the one hand he wants to be a good person, on the other he wants to show them there hillbillies that he's better than their incompetent asses.
 
I think he seems to be a guy in conflict. On the one hand he wants to be a good person, on the other he wants to show them there hillbillies that he's better than their incompetent asses.
Vance is way better than any leftard's incompetent ass.

Come to think of it, a hillbilly is way better too. So is the dogcatcher. So is a blindfolded six year old.

If leftards spent as much time on policy as they do on Trump, they might be able to improve this country. As it stands, all that TDS is sucking cycles out of any improvement.
 
Gay people can have families too. Democrats allow abortion for those who want it. Sometimes abortion makes for better families in the long run, especially when it's people who aren't mature enough to look after kids or have a family.

No, kids per social worker isn't a great measure, I went looking for child abuse per state and realized that the stats would only include those the state decide were subjected to child abuse which would vary state to state. So a state might have high child abuse because they state doesn't take it seriously, but report really low levels of child abuse because they just don't find the abuse that is happening. So, I went with one statistic that is more concrete, something that says more.

Really it's hard to know which states give abused kids a better chance, which states stop abuse before it starts, but you can bet Louisiana and Mississippi would be at the bottom of any list were there one.

Single parent families are a problem, and DC is at the top, and then two Republican states 2nd and 3rd. A lot of Republican states do worse than democratic states, but again, not black and white.

So, overall there are certain states, Mississippi and Louisiana at the top, that are ******* awful for the family, states in the north east probably the best, and then it depends what happens in between.

Here, it's basically a list of right wing states, at 13 is Rhode Island which is the first (aside from DC) which is a proper left wing state.
MS and LA are two very poor states. I'm not sure where DC lands on avg family income. The differences between states is very small, a percent or two, and as you say there is no national standard. IMHO other factors influence family survival other than red/blue, income being a major factor.

Back to the OP, major factors in being pro-family are
1. two parents in the home
2. adequate income
3. religious and church going?
4. race?
5. social safety net and daycare?
6. family planning?
 
Vance sounds horribly immature to me.
You have to get past many many millions of miles of immature Progressives to get to Vance. Only the Progressives are dangerous, and many are brainwashed.
 
15th post
MS and LA are two very poor states. I'm not sure where DC lands on avg family income. The differences between states is very small, a percent or two, and as you say there is no national standard. IMHO other factors influence family survival other than red/blue, income being a major factor.

Back to the OP, major factors in being pro-family are
1. two parents in the home
2. adequate income
3. religious and church going?
4. race?
5. social safety net and daycare?
6. family planning?

Yes, they're poor states. And the rich are out to make sure they stay rich and the poor stay poor.

Two parent families are good for stability. Often people who provide a stable home are people who can remain in a two parent family.

Take Vance. His mother ended up with lots of different men, and Vance found the stability with his grandparents, not with his father (who had a stable family that was two parents) and not with his mother who was a druggie and argued all the time with just about everyone.

His mother just was never going to be that stable person he needed. She couldn't be stable for herself.

People who can hold down jobs are more likely to be stable.

People who go to church are more likely to be stable. Some, like Vance's father get religion and calm down, but for the most part people who are going to be stable, will go to church.

Race... well race has a lot of issues.

In the UK black Africans have better educational achievement that white British. Black Caribbean have a much worse educational achievement. Is it about race? No, it's about CULTURE. The Caribbean kids have gangs, the Yardies from Jamaica went into the UK in the 1980s. Education is more important or the African kids than for the Caribbean kids and parents.

Culture in the US for black people, especially, is a tough one. Like hillbillies, they suffer the same problems, and cycles of violence, anger, lack of maturity and the like mean it goes from generation to generation.

Vance says he could easily have ended up being just another hillbilly. He used to get angry and shout at his wife, but she refused to let him do it. So he got lucky, and he was born with a brain that allowed his to study for 20 hours a day, or work 20 hours a day, that has a huge impact. Had he had a concentration problem he'd be a four times divorced alcoholic or druggie.
 
Back
Top Bottom