If Charlie Baker was the great leader everyone claims him to be, he’d be the first to urge Fisher’s inclusion on the Primary ballot. So much for that.
But more to the point. Fisher got his 15% when you don’t count blanks which the rules dictate shouldn’t be counted!
We all agree that Baker got 2095 votes and Fisher got 374. What’s at issue is 64 blank votes that make the difference percentage-wise. Do they count? Theyre not suppsoed to!
What do the experts say:
Convention Rule 23 states that Robert’s Rules of Order are to govern on matters not specifically covered by the convention rules. Robert’s Rules, as I understand them as an amateur parliamentarian (I am the parliamentarian of the UMass Boston Faculty Council) regards abstention or blank ballots as not counting at all, thus they are not part of the denominator, and therefor Fisher may have his 15 percent.
On top of which, there was obvious institutional collusion between state GOP officials and Baker, putting Fisher at a disadvantage. Take for instance convention chairman (and experienced driver under the influence) Matt Sisk:
It is incredibly unseemly to have speakers proclaiming “Charlie Baker will be our next Governor” from the podium when the race is still contested. I have no reason to believe the MA GOP vets the remarks of all speakers, but I will bet it vets the remarks of the honorary chairman. The fact that Sisk made this statement from the podium while acting in his official capacity says everything you need to know about the MA GOP.
Meanwhile, Rob Cunningham can’t get his story straight because he’s trying to avoid admitting that the fix was in for Charlie.
What does it say about the Massachusetts Republican Party when it does its best to illegally kick conservative candidates off the ballot?
What do you stand for? Cuz it doesnt seem to be democracy or freedom.