Sunday, July 11, 2010

What’s Best for “Your Guy” at the LCMS Convention?

Today’s session of the LCMS Convention has just concluded.

Judging from the internet questions and comments flying back and forth (which of course is the ultimate arbiter in taking the “pulse” of public opinion), many people are talking about the defeat of the proposed amendment to today’s agenda which would have moved the balloting for President to this morning. Like trying to discern the future using tea leaves (or a Magic 8 Ball, which is my preferred method), people are trying to read something into the results of this vote, which by the margin of 51.5% was voted down (i.e. the vote for President will be taken on Tuesday).

Putting the best construction on the vote, I’d think that many of the delegates really voted based on their personal opinion of what was best for doing the Lord’s work. Yes, I’m sure there were quite a few who were voting based on what they perceived was best for “their guy” (which I'm sure they believe is doing the Lord's work), but from what I’ve seen, many people weren’t really sure what was best for their guy.

My personal (if somewhat unsolicited) opinion, if you want the best indicator for how the delegates will vote for President, take a look at the number of nominations received for each candidate for President (which just happens to be in favor of “my guy,” Pastor Matt Harrison):

Matthew Harrison - 1,332

Gerald Kieschnick - 755

Herbert Mueller Jr. - 503

Carl Fickenscher II - 5

Daniel Gard - 3

Segments 1-4 of Floor Committee 8’s presentation have been completed. When business resumes tomorrow, it will be voted upon whether or not the delegates would like further discussion and continue on with segment 5, or whether they’d like to begin voting on portions of the resolutions immediately.

Thanks to all the delegates out there for putting in the time commitment to do a good job. I appreciate all of your hard work.

"Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD, whose trust is the LORD" (Jeremiah 17:7 ESV).

photo credit: bark

1 comment:

Mark Miller said...

I would guess that the nominations are not a particularly good proxy for the eventual presidential vote, in that the Harrison supporters tend to be more engaged, hence more likely to move their congregations to nominate, while the Kieschnick supporters tend to include many more moderate "vote for the incumbent, things are pretty good" types, whose congregations were less likely to nominate.

My guess is that the vote to move up the election is a better proxy, however with a bias: some unknown percentage of H. supporters voted to keep the agenda as is out of respect for the established order; while it is unlikely that many if any K. supporters would have voted to move it up.

If I am correct in my analysis, then the outcome of the presidential election depends on the size of this bias. if it is small (<2%), then Kieschnick wins. If it is moderate to large (>4%), then Harrison wins. Either way, I predict the presidential vote will be exceedingly close.