Chris, I know that you have been counting delegates, and that you are well aware that Deval Patrick will get (at least) 50% of the delegates in attendance on the first (and therefore only) ballot. Therefore there will be no second ballot.
In asking for my vote on the “first” ballot, it is clear that your campaign is somehow underestimating the number of Patrick delegates or that you don’t understand that the rules have changed since your last convention. Or perhaps, more insidiously, you are trying to trick me into voting for you.
Isn’t it enough that you used an erroneous interpretation of the rules to get access to the convention in the first place? Now you have resorted to implying to delegates that there will be more than one ballot. Please stop trying to trick me.
Would you prefer the script be changed to “LAST”, “ONLY” or remain “FIRST”?
<
p>
It seems to me that “FIRST” in fact doesn’t misrepresent anything whereas the others certainly would.
<
p>
That is because FIRST is always the FIRST, no matter how many ballots there are.
<
p>
How could someone ask someone for a vote on the ONLY ballot, when there is no way in knowing if it will be the ONLY ballot?
<
p>
How could someone ask someone for a vote on the LAST ballot, when there is
no way in knowing if it will be the LAST ballot?
<
p>
I bet no matter how it was described, you would find a way to complain about it.
The impression I get is that Gabrieli is asking delegates who support other candidates to lend him their vote on the first ballot, with the implication that they can vote for who they want on the second ballot. The reason this is tricky is not that he’s calling the first ballot the first ballot, but that he’s not mentioning the rules change that makes the first ballot the only one that counts for qualifying for the September primary. It’s pretty clear what the issue is.
From today’s Globe:
<
p>