You are correct, Tom Chryst. Circuit delegates and congregational nominations are the two main tasks we need to get done in advance of the convention. The reason I did not mention nominations at this time is that that process does not begin until late October (although we can certainly do some prep work before then, to get congregations familiar with a candidate). Right now the task at hand is delegates.

I’d add one thing. Perhaps just as important is getting as many nominations for the right presidential candidate as possible.

It is powerfully persuasive to “undecided” delegates if a candidate, especially a challenger, gets more congregational nominations than the other. People have a natural tendency to vote with the crowd, or on the “winning side”.

So in this way, too, the convention (at least the election of president) may be decided well before July of 2010.

Remember that each congregation gets to nominate 2 for President. So even if it’s a congregation of mixed opinion (some favoring the incumbent, some not) they should be encouraged to nominate both men!!

Just as it’s hard to overstate the importance of electing delegates at the circuit forums, it’s also paramount to win the nomination contest, too.

Well, this time let’s do it with a more positive attitude.

I didn’t mean to do that. I know that that’s not been your position at all. But I have heard that thinking from others, that if only we could control things, things would get better in the synod. If it were only “our” guys, etc.

Actually I think if Matt is elected, things might tend to get worse in the synod, but it would be a good kind of worse because our differences and disunity might actually start being addressed in an honest, open way.

Bingo! That’s what we need to be doing, George, and that’s why I wrote this article. I know I have never thought or suggested that we can “save the synod” and automatically get everyone theologically united just by winning a presidential election. But that should not stop us from trying to win the presidential election! Harrison as SP instead of Kieschnick would be a huge improvement! Many decisions, appointments, etc., would be a whole lot better theologically. And Harrison would support and encourage and seek to implement the *long-term* task of building increased theological unity in doctrine and practice.

Don’t get me wrong. We should be doing those things. But we’ve been doing it for how long &, if we believe your take on things, we’ve only moved closer to an episcopal system? I fail to see that as a solution.

My thoughts in Comment #11 still sums up the situation for me. We do what we can & realize that even if we do take back a majority of votes & positions in our synod, that that doesn’t solve our problems or bring unity or do away with the bureaucratic power structure that’s in place.

Still doesn’t mean I’m not going to present Matthew Harrison as a candidate for President to my congregation or that I’m not going to go to the Circuit Forum along with a lay member to participate in choosing delegates for the convention.