Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewb
Now the person who posts a load of pedantic rubbish about using the word 'think' rather than posting absolute facts, has now gone on to write a ton of posts based on 'reported' and 'presumed' interpretations of selection procedures.
I think it's a good that you've brought them up. I just find it very hypocritical that you would attack other users posts for not being absolute fact and undermine their content without actually addressing or discussing the issue, and then go on to use reported and presumed content yourself. Makes you look like a silly billy.
As was mentioned earlier, according to the available information, Hyndburn will not be an imposed shortlist as it does not match the criteria quoted.
I've already said I disagree with all women shortlists, although this digresses from the topic considering what I've already said. In other areas though I can't see AWS happening, especially since the person responsible for the idea has now stepped down and out of the selection procedure.
|
I don't 'think', we can see there is reported struggle between the local and national Conservative party, regarding the selection of a suitable candidate list. I've supplied evidence from the press, which had quotes regarding the matter from a neighbouring Conservative MP. There's also evidence in this thread, supplied by a close friend of Peeter Britcliffe, that there is disagrement, which is presumably why there hasn't been a short-list announced to the public.
As a bystander it will be interesting to see who wins the power struggle, in a seat the Conservatives think is winnable...if they can eventually agree on someone, and actually field a candidate.
There's nothing like unity...and this is nothing like unity.