The EU debate - Part III

You've skipped a few replies and are reading the wrong answers. I answered that one too.

 

It would never win the punters over , we work to common law not to a backward religious one that treats women as second rate, so can you see many women voting for it?

 

Theresa May is hardly going to come out and admit that it's Tory policy to **** over most of the electorate, is she?

As for youngsters running up credit card bills, I think that you'll find that this is due to older people.
They've kicked the can for decades and are now lumbering youngsters with their debt.
They still don't want to pay it, so they're ****ing up the economy and wrecking public services.

 

I'm being totally honest and saying your reply was bollocks.

Have another go at wording your question, and I'll have a bash at answering it again.

Just to recap, as you two seem a tad confused.

I'm saying that if a party has a manifesto that includes a referendum on an issue, and that party gets elected, I'd vote in the referendum.

Now, what's your question?

 

I said Sarah's Law in that comment, not Sharia. It's the sex offender database.

 

I'm assuming he meant Sharia, when he mentioned Sarah's Law?

 

What's the point? You won't answer it, as you've already demonstrated.
Why post on here if you're not going to be honest and spend the whole time dodging?
I may not agree with Pete or even The Zlatan, but they don't hide.

 

As daft as they were, I've just answered all the questions you've asked you tit.

 

You're answering a question that hasn't been asked rather than the one that was. If @PleaseNotPoll disagrees I'll take it back, given it wasn't his question.

However, we've been here before. History suggests there's more chance of Pete winning the London marathon than getting a straight answer out you first or even third or fourth time.

 

I mentioned both.
Sarah's Law is the sex database access one. Sharia is the Islamic way of living.

 

Not sure about the older generation passing debt down. They tend to be from a generation where if you couldn't afford it, you went without?
Unless that's not what you meant?

 

Is this some sort of wind up I'm missing?

I answered the question that was asked. I even elaborated on it.

 

Sarahs law would win a popular vote

 

Seemingly not in Tottenham.

 

So what is your position? Do you want to reduce the national debt or increase it?

 

Not individually, but as a whole. The debt of the country.

Youngsters nowdays will be the first generation to be poorer than their parents, due to policy choices of the Baby Boomers.
They took advantage of a vast number of benefits, then pulled up the drawbridge and shat on their kids.

 

That's what I was saying. That doesn't mean that it should be put to a referendum, in my opinion.

 

Those aren't the choices. It's not austerity or increasing national debt, especially as it's actually doing that.

 

But we don't tend to have referendum's without it effectively being voted for as part of a party's electoral manifesto.