Tonight is a good night!

[valpotx]

One thing the dems do well is social media and getting people out to vote.  Even if a good amount of younger voters had no clue what issues they were truly supporting, they got them out to vote again, and more on the dem side.  It was surprising that polls indicate 90%+ of African American voters went for Obama, definitely something that would need to change in 2016 if Reps are to have a chance as well.

[LaPorteAveApostle]

That would be true if they weren't decreasing in numbers.  It's Hispanics that need attention because they a) are increasing b) are actually inclined to vote Republican because more naturally conservative.

[valporun]

I'm agreeing with what you're saying, post election about what the Republican party needs to do to reach out to the Hispanic community that wants to support the Conservative intentions/issues, but the leadership in the Republican party forced Romney to be far right. They wanted to focus everything on Obama's leadership faults, but the defensive kept having to be deflecting the mud being slung about how he was out of touch and only sounding like he was playing to far right, 1% of the country financially.

tx, I agree, the youth got more involved because of how they could swing the election to "get out the vote" at their fingertips with texting, Twitter, Facebook, and whatever other social media things they could use to get the word out. I mean they could commonly stand in a lunch line and tweet or instant message something they were hearing, as though their smartphone became the modern day "water cooler".

It will be interesting to see what both parties do in the next four years, since we'll be electing a fresh face in 2016. I'm a Democrat, but I don't see Vice President Biden being a good option in four years.

[StlVUFan]

I'm agreeing with what you're saying, post election about what the Republican party needs to do to reach out to the Hispanic community that wants to support the Conservative intentions/issues, but the leadership in the Republican party forced Romney to be far right. They wanted to focus everything on Obama's leadership faults, but the defensive kept having to be deflecting the mud being slung about how he was out of touch and only sounding like he was playing to far right, 1% of the country financially.

tx, I agree, the youth got more involved because of how they could swing the election to "get out the vote" at their fingertips with texting, Twitter, Facebook, and whatever other social media things they could use to get the word out. I mean they could commonly stand in a lunch line and tweet or instant message something they were hearing, as though their smartphone became the modern day "water cooler".

It will be interesting to see what both parties do in the next four years, since we'll be electing a fresh face in 2016. I'm a Democrat, but I don't see Vice President Biden being a good option in four years.

The last time this happened, we were left with Bush v. Gore.  I certainly hope both parties can do much better than those two.

By the way, I don't know that I need a candidate to relate to me in order to vote for him/her.

[agibson]

Just clicked on this thread for the first time. Here I figured the time stamp would be Nov 6!

[covufan]

The last time this happened, we were left with Bush v. Gore.  I certainly hope both parties can do much better than those two.

Of course some are saying (a little early mind you) that it could be Bush v Biden in four years.

[valporun]

Just what I hope doesn't happen...

The last time this happened, we were left with Bush v. Gore.  I certainly hope both parties can do much better than those two.

Of course some are saying (a little early mind you) that it could be Bush v Biden in four years.

[StlVUFan]

The last time this happened, we were left with Bush v. Gore.  I certainly hope both parties can do much better than those two.

Of course some are saying (a little early mind you) that it could be Bush v Biden in four years.

Jeb, I presume?

[valporun]

Yeah, it would be Jeb. George P. Bush is too young yet for the "old faithful" of the GOP to throw their hats behind. Regardless, I'm not interested in another Bush in office, nor do I want Joe Biden, even as a Democrat, because I don't trust his politics enough to get us out of a see-through plastic bag.

[agibson]

In the "family business" discussion, the notion of Bill Clinton replacing Hillary as Secretary of State amused me.

(As did the idea that Hillary likes "Love it or Leave It".  "Property Brothers" is a much better program!)

[StlVUFan]

Yeah, it would be Jeb. George P. Bush is too young yet for the "old faithful" of the GOP to throw their hats behind. Regardless, I'm not interested in another Bush in office, nor do I want Joe Biden, even as a Democrat, because I don't trust his politics enough to get us out of a see-through plastic bag.

I'm afraid I agree on both counts.

[LaPorteAveApostle]

In '08 I told everyone I wanted Hillary, then Jeb in 2012, Chelsea in 2020, and George P in 2024 so that we could look back on 1988-2032 as "the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush years".

[valporun]

In '08 I told everyone I wanted Hillary, then Jeb in 2012, Chelsea in 2020, and George P in 2024 so that we could look back on 1988-2032 as "the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush years".

Sad to say the "Obama" threw off your prediction, blew it out of proportion a little.

[vu72]

Yeah, it would be Jeb. George P. Bush is too young yet for the "old faithful" of the GOP to throw their hats behind. Regardless, I'm not interested in another Bush in office, nor do I want Joe Biden, even as a Democrat, because I don't trust his politics enough to get us out of a see-through plastic bag.

As a republican, the idea of Joe Biden being the democratic nominee is REALLY exciting!  However, I agree he won't be the pick, he is clown like in the view of even the late night comedians.  Hilary is a possibility I would think, but I expecting another person of color or a women, countered by a person of color or a women.  wouldn't surprise me at all to see two women running for President.  Who from the democratic side do you think, run??

[setshot]

I'd choose Amy Klobucher on the Democratic side and the LCMS member Michele Bachmann as the Republican candidate. Debate wise,Klobucher would show the world just how dumb and insular Michele is. Go Amy!

[vuweathernerd]

I'd choose Amy Klobucher on the Democratic side and the LCMS member Michele Bachmann as the Republican candidate. Debate wise,Klobucher would show the world just how dumb and insular Michele is. Go Amy!

except bachman's not a lutheran anymore. she's labeled an evangelical christian.

[vu72]

Pretty sure she wasn't LCMS either, porbably not conservative enough!!  I think it was Wisconsin.

Now Amy is smart but just to darn homely to get the nomination!!

[historyman]

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/15/michele-bachmann-officially-leaves-her-church/

[StlVUFan]

Pretty sure she wasn't LCMS either, porbably not conservative enough!!  I think it was Wisconsin.

I should know better, but for some reason I read this as "Bachman ... not conservative enough" for the LCMS, instead of the other way around.  DUH.

Is WELS now the "line in the sand" of Lutheran denominations for "The Pope is the antichrist" ideology?  It was LCMS at one time, I think.

[vu72]

Now that i read the article on her leaving, it did say that her former church was part of the Wisconsin Synod. Yes, St. Louie, Wisconsin is viewed as the most conservative bunch of Lutherans, not that i'm an expert, as i'm part of the "left wing" Lutherans, the ELCA 

[valporun]

vu72, right now, I'm under such election fatigue that I'm not sure who the Democrats are talking about, but I believe, and I'll check on it later, Hilary said that once she's resigned as Secretary of State, she's DONE with politics. She'll be almost 70-years-old by the time the 2016 election comes, will she really have the energy to want to spend months fundraising and campaigning? Biden is a definite clown that the GOP wants running because they could counter with either Romney or Ryan, and kill Biden easily.

At this time though, I have no idea, and I just want to get past Inauguration Day, see what happens to this country, and try to find some full-time work before 2014, so I don't have to pay health insurance penalties.

[FWalum]

Now that i read the article on her leaving, it did say that her former church was part of the Wisconsin Synod. Yes, St. Louie, Wisconsin is viewed as the most conservative bunch of Lutherans, not that i'm an expert, as i'm part of the "left wing" Lutherans, the ELCA 

Surprised you did not mention the section of the article that quotes a VU professor!

The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod has come under criticism from some Catholics for its views on the papacy, an institution that the denomination calls the Antichrist.

"We identify the Antichrist as the Papacy," the denomination's website says. "This is an historical judgment based on Scripture."

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights issued a statement Thursday about Bachmann's denomination, saying it's "regrettable that there are still strains of anti-Catholicism in some Protestant circles."

"But we find no evidence of any bigotry on the part of Rep. Michele Bachmann," the statement continued. "Indeed, she has condemned anti-Catholicism. Just as President Barack Obama is not responsible for the views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rep. Bachmann must be judged on the basis of her own record."

The debate over the legitimacy of the papacy goes back to the Protestant Reformation. The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod's namesake is Martin Luther, who led the 16th century Reformation and who opposed the papacy.

"The issue of the papacy as the Antichrist does go back to Luther - he did use that terminology," said Professor George C. Heider, theology chair at Valparaiso University, a Lutheran school in Indiana.

"Luther's point was, that in his view, the pope was so obstructing the gospel of God's free love in Jesus, even though he wore all the trappings of a leader in the church," Heider said. "He was functioning as the New Testament describes it as the Antichrist."

Still, Heider notes that Roman Catholics and Lutherans have close ties today. They recognize each other's baptisms, a point of contention in relations between the Catholic Church and other Protestant denominations.

[StlVUFan]

I'm well aware that WELS is more conservative than LCMS (and there are more obscure Lutheran denominations that ever more conservative than WELS).

What I'm wondering is: does the LCMS still profess the papacy to be the anti-christ, or have they abandoned that position.  It was one of the lesser conflicts going on in the background of the Seminex controversy in the late 60s/early 70s.

[FWalum]

I'm well aware that WELS is more conservative than LCMS (and there are more obscure Lutheran denominations that ever more conservative than WELS).

What I'm wondering is: does the LCMS still profess the papacy to be the anti-christ, or have they abandoned that position.  It was one of the lesser conflicts going on in the background of the Seminex controversy in the late 60s/early 70s.

From as LCMS FAQ page.

Connection between the antichrist and the pope

Q: As a Methodist living in a new town, I have found a local LCMS church where I feel comfortable
and fed. Seeking information, I have looked over your pages on the net and have developed some
questions. The connection between the antichrist and pope are unclear to me. Do you believe the pope
is the only enemy?

A: The LCMS does not teach, nor has it ever taught, that any individual Pope as a person, is to be
identified with the Antichrist. The historic view of LCMS on the Antichrist is summarized as follows by
the Synod's Theological Commission:

The New Testament predicts that the church throughout its history will witness many antichrists (Matt.
24:5,23-24; Mark 13:6,21-22; Luke 21:8; 1 John 2:18,22; 4:3; 2 John 7). All false teachers who teach
contrary to Christ's Word are opponents of Christ and, insofar as they do so, are anti-Christ.

However, the Scriptures also teach that there is one climactic "Anti-Christ" (Dan. 7:8,11, 20-21, 24-25;
11:36-45; 2 Thessalonians 2; 1 John 2:18; 4:3; Revelation 17-18). . . Concerning the historical identity of
the Antichrist, we affirm the Lutheran Confessions' identification of the Antichrist with the office of the
papacy whose official claims continue to correspond to the Scriptural marks listed above. It is important,
however, that we observe the distinction which the Lutheran Confessors made between the office of
the pope (papacy) and the individual men who fill that office. The latter could be Christians themselves.
We do not presume to judge any person's heart. Also, we acknowledge the possibility that the historical
form of the Antichrist cold change. Of course, in that case another identified by these marks would rise.

In a footnote, the Commission adds:

To the extent that the papacy continues to claim as official dogma the canons and decrees of the Council
of Trent which expressly anathematizes, for instance, the doctrine "that justifying faith is nothing else
than trust in divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that trust alone by which we
are justified," the judgment of the Lutheran confessional writings that the papacy is the Antichrist holds.
At the same time, of course, we must recognize the possibility, under God's guidance, that
contemporary discussions and statements (e.g., 1983 U.S. Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue statement
on "Justification by Faith") could lead to a revision of the Roman Catholic position regarding Tridentine
dogma.

Usage: We urge you to contact an LCMS pastor in your area for more in-depth discussion.
Published by: LCMS Church Information Center

©The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
1333 S. Kirkwood Road, St. Louis, MO 63122-7295
888-843-5267 • infocenter@lcms.org • www.lcms.org/faqs

[bbtds]

In '08 I told everyone I wanted Hillary, then Jeb in 2012, Chelsea in 2020, and George P in 2024 so that we could look back on 1988-2032 as "the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush years".

Why does Chelsea only get 4 years?  FDRoosevelt was elected to 4 terms!!!!

Personally I think Chelsea would have gotten 5 terms with Monica Lewinsky as her Madam Vice President. We all know the VP is there to look good and be stupid enough to do everything the president says no matter what. Chelsea knows just exactly how skilled Miss Lewinsky is at that.