home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

AP - Thoughts on the upcoming US Presidential election

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Archived Post

Joined: 15 Oct 2003
Posts: 234
Location: Skyscript

Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:07 am    Post subject: AP - Thoughts on the upcoming US Presidential election Reply with quote

23 Sept 2003


Has anyone read Adrian Duncan's article in the lastest Mountain Astrologer about the 2004 US election? He makes some interesting points. One of the most interesting is that the Sun moves by progression into Pisces on the day of the election. (that's the handy thing about US elections - you always know the chart way ahead) He also suggests that Hillary Clinton will end up running and could well win. He is confident of a change of government. There you go Beth. Your wishes might just come true.

There is also a fabulous and very accurate review of this wonderful website and well-earned praise for the host.



Thanks, I keep hoping Kerry will win. Hillery is a good stateswoman, but I fear that the misogynists would make getting anything done around here damn near impossible if she were president right now.

My anti bush heart would love to see Kerry, Gephardt and Clark in the whitehouse... =)
(before you go thinking ahhhh democrat, I voted for McCain in the last presidential primary, I like people who are more level headed and dont blindly send people to fight battles they are too cowardly to fight themselves.)

I think I'll try to look up Kerry's birth info and see how it compares with the election day. if anyone already has it... =)

I need to break down and get a subscription to the mountain astrologer I guess...



I wouldn't get too excited about any prediction in the Mountain astrologer regarding US Elections. I can't recall their ever predicitng a Republican Victory for anything. I would count them first and foremost among those who think the cosmos arrange themselves to reflect their (rather obivous leftist) political views.

I recall an incident at my astrology group in 1988. The charts were up and the group swooned over the impending victory of Michael Dukakis. Perhaps the only objective person in the room was the group's President Ken Negus who said, "You really can't tell from this (transists to natal charts). The only thing that seems certain is that whoever wins will only serve one term."

Dukakis won about 4 of the 50 states and George Bush only served one term. It is pretty obvious who was doing astrology and who was wishing. Wishful thinking does not make good predictive astrology.

Astrologers, as a group, tend to be more than a little bit lefty. Most can't get past this prejudice, and it is rare that they even notice it regardless of how many times their guy loses.

And I have a better chance of being the next US President than John Kerry does.



Well, you might have to start packing your bags and heading for the White House, Tom. According to my newspaper this morning he is ahead of Bush in the polls and doing very well. The report also said that this has prompted Hillary to rethink her decision not to run. Everyone seems to be speculating that she will.

I wasn't so much interested in the prediction itself but rather the symbolism involved. The progressed Sun moving into Pisces on the day of the election has got to say something for America. This in turn should have significance for who gets voted in regardless of whether he or she is a Republican or Democrat. As we have talked about before, we never quite know how particular symbolism is going to manifest. To quote Adrian from the article, ' is difficult to know whether a politician will ride the collective wave symbolized by the transit or be drowned by it.' We have also talked briefly about the difficulties of having Pluto transiting the natal descendant. Tony Blair got elected overwhelmingly while undergoing this transit. The successful candidate will be the person who most closely resonates with the symbolism of the time, whether that symbolism is positive or negative.



Despite the fact that the fate of the nation as well as the world would be in excellent hands should I be elected, I don't think I'll pack just yet. Did you know that there are more zodiacs in public places in Washington DC, by far, than any other major city in the world?

I think you've got John Kerry mixed up with Wesley Clark. Polls are supposedly showing Clark ahead of the President and even a smattering of thought makes that difficult to believe. He is a virtual unknown and he made a complete fool of himself in his first, and I think only public appearance on a major news show prior to his "advent" by claiming the White House asked him to link Al Queda to the 9/11 attacks. When they immeidately denied it, he said "No, no, no I didn't mean the White House it was a think tank in Canada." It is easy to see how a potential US President could get that mixed up. After his annointment by the Clintons he got all fouled up on the exceedingly difficult question of whether or not he would have voted for the resolution to send troops to war in Iraq. So why wouldn't he be ahead in the polls? The entire poll was probably taken on an Ivy League college campus.

Kerry's answer is by far the best on the war. He admits voting for it (denial would be tough; it's a matter of public record), but says he only did so because he thought the President wouldn't really go to war. He would just use the resolution to frighten Iraq who had yet to be frightened by 17 UN resolutions. With conviction such as this, it is small wonder that he went from front-runner to flop in no time.

OK there is an astrological point coming up. Prediction about world events is silly if the astrologer doesn't understnd the events and how they take place. We might be able to correctly diagnose the problem with the family car once in a while if we know a tiny bit about about auto mechanics, but the reliability of our predictions is imporoved if we genuinely understand how the car works. Far too many astrologers in the US lack this understanding and prefer to rely on nondescript words as "change." The Mountain Astrologer is the best example of this way of "thinking."

It is traditional that the incumbent President does nothing to respond to the accusations made by prospective candidates during the 18 months or so of what is called "primary season." To do so is time consuming and he would not look "Presidential." It is far better to wait until the actual campaign. In short while all the pot shots are being taken, the President rarely fights back. This results in the early polls making challengers' chance's look better than they are. This is not to say challengers never win. They can and do, but they don't win until election day, or sometimes, as in the last election, they don't win until weeks later. Getting all excited about unseating an incumbent we don't like because of "change" promised in a chart is, frankly, silly. And the writer you quoted should have known better.

I'm not sure which progressed Sun you're referring to, probably the US progressed Sun. I think change of some sort is an apt prediction, but since the progressed Sun will be in Pisces a long time, I would look for a much more significant change than a change in who will be president for no more than four years. Furthermore a change in the US position does not necessarily imply a change in President. The Bush administration could undergo profound change while still remaining in office. A significant change would be the Republicans maintaining control of the House and Senate for years to come. The Democrats controlled the house for over 40 consecutive years, and only lost control in 1994.

This is why I can't get too excited over predictions of "change." Such predictions are fodder for the skeptics. Tell me which one of the contenders will be the Democratic nominee. Tell me how the election will go, not just who will win, and give me sound astrological reasons for doing so. In other words give me a concrete verifiable prediction. That will be impressive and demonstrate astrological prowess. Predicting "change" is silly.

But in order to do that, the astrologer would have to demonstrate his or her knowledge of precisely how this government and the election process works. The astrologer would have to understnad the US Constitution and therefore could no longer make petulant accusations that the current President was not legally elected, but to do that would require effort knowledge and skill. It is easier to predict change, and then waffle on it by claiming not to know exactly what the change is. One doesn't even need a chart to win on a prediction like that.

I hope the tone of this isn't too disconcerting. My ire is certainly not aimed at you or even anyoe on this list. It is directed what passes for mundane astrology these days, and the fact that a noble art gets more and more idiotic with each passing year.



I hope everyone reads your post Tom. My views keep going from one place to another as I’m thinking through the points that you and Sue are raising.

I haven’t read the article but I understand Adrian Duncan to be a very credible astrologer, not easily inclined to political bias. I also hold the view that Sue is expressing – that the person whose own astrological factors most strongly resonate to the mood of the nation as expressed through their astrological factors is likely to sweep up support from the public and come to a head as the person who defines their will.

I normally try to keep clear of political issues, because I certainly don’t know enough about the political process – I’ve never heard of some of the names being mentioned here. But I’ve made a few political predictions and where I have ventured I’ve had good results by eliminating everything but astrology. For example, a few years ago in one of my horary tours of Australia, I was put in that unenviable position of being asked to predict the winner of an election publicly before the results were announced using the charts for the opening of the polls. To me the astrology was fairly clear and straightforward and I felt aided by the fact that I knew nothing about the main candidates, the process involved or who was expected to win. I could only be guided by the astrology and I gather that my correct prediction went against the polls and public expectations. Other astrologers found it hard to come to the same conclusion, even though they had a much better understanding of the system, because that often entails having some kind of bias and being influenced by what ‘makes sense’. I’ve had quite a few similar examples – I hate football, hate astrological predictions of winners at sport but I’ve been lucky and when forced, my ignorance of sporting expectations has served me well. (I look at the transits occurring around the two capitals in question at the time of the event for important matches – victory usually shows factors of rejoicing and public expressions of success around the angles for the home location with dejection in the location of the losers). I’ve also traded successfully with astrology, even though what I understand about financial cycles can be written on one sheet of paper. Even so, I wouldn’t want to do this on a regular basis and think I have been very fortunate so far not to have tripped up with egg all over my face. The astrological factors are often very deep and complicated, and not so easily read.

I’m all for that voice that cries out for caution. Ideally, good political astrologers need to understand the process, but then how can they avoid being affected by public expectations? I have seen this done by astrologers: Ken Bowser for example, predicting that OJ Simpson would beat the charge and walk free because of factors in his chart when most astrologers were assessing the indications of guilt and concluding otherwise. But it’s a rare occurrence. One thing I have found to be a reliable constant – polls mean nothing. Any astrologer that takes too much notice of polls, even those that appear to be reliable and obvious, is being led away from clear astrological judgement.

I agree its embarrassing when astrologers scramble to make these predictions before the event and then scramble to explain away their mistakes afterwards, but I think it’s a good thing when astrologers discuss their astrological assessments of the situation with each other, especially when they do that free of prejudice. Mundane astrology is worthy of study and very illuminating. As we get close to the event I hope the discussion centres around who is likely to emerge successfully and why, rather than who ought to win, who’s the best man (woman) for the job, who has devious motives, etc. All politicians have devious motives – that’s the definition of being political isn’t it?



Yes it is, I suppose. As much as we in the US venerate our founding fathers, it is also true that more than a couple of them had ulterior motives. Why not push for independence when, if you remain a British colony, you'll likely be hanged for smuggling? I they think they call that pragmatism or was that patriotism?

I think with sport it is in the astrologer's best interest not to have an interest. I am or was a sports fan, but over the years lost interest in following particular teams. I correctly picked the last two Super Bowl winners, both underdogs, largely because I didn't follow the season and had no idea how much of an underdog my pick was in one of them.

Politics is a bit more complex, particularly since so much can happen in such a short time in these days of rapid communication. The other part of politics is that, unlike a sporting event, one needs to know the rules. Electing an American President has almost nothing in common with electing, say, a British Prime Minister. And these are among the great democracies. Predicting the downfall of a dicatator or his rise is much more difficult. Predicting the next Democratic Presidential candidate is extremely complex given the circus-like atmosphere that accompanies every primary season regardless of which party is out of power. And this isn't the most complex situation. Should GW Bush win another four years, four years after that 4 or 10 members of EACH party will go through this assinine exercise for 12 or so months. I think it is best regarded as entertainment.

I'm going to wait until the dust settles. We all know GW Bush has difficult transits coming up at election time in 2004. To me that indicates he'll win. How stressful is it when your most important decision is to select which iron to use on the fairway? But that isn't enough, and I know it. And I will admit here and now for the record, I'll have a hard time hiding my biases when the time comes.

I am intrigued with the Progressed Sun changing signs at election time. That needs a real look.



Hi Tom,
I think the Progressed Sun changing signs is quite interesting. Of course, it won't tell us who will win the election and it doesn't necessarily indicate a change in government. I am far more interested in looking at the symbolism of surrounding energies rather than who will win the election. What I believe it could indicate is the shifting identity of the American people as a nation. Obviously people in the US are not going to wake up on the 2nd Nov and suddenly see themselves as being more Piscean. But I can see a gradual shifting of identity. Naturally the basic identity of the natal chart will remain but I think there will be a Piscean overlay to this. There is a lot of questioning of national values going on. There can't help but be with everything that has been going on. Even in the last week or so there has been a subtle shifting in the way Bush has approached things. I am speaking purely as an astrological observer here not as a political observer. The progressed Sun doesn't move into Pisces for just over a year but it is interesting to look at it in terms of energies around the cusp. The way I see it, there are two energies (Aquarian and Piscean) that will be struggling to gain attantion. It's almost like Pisces has been moving it's stuff into the home but Aquarius hasn't finished packing yet to move out. Aquarius has been living there for nearly 30 years so isn't about to leave in a hurry. So perhaps there is more of a Piscean attitude coming into the US psyche but is still being applied in an Aquarian way. Not to mention the energies of the Cancer Sun in the radical chart. It might be easier to blend the two water energies once the Sun has progressed into Pisces.

It might be interesting to have a look at what was happening in the US when the Sun progressed from Capricorn into Aquarius and whether national identity shifted in any way.

To be honest, I haven't thought this through in any great detail. It's just something that occured to me as one possible manifestation of a progressed Sun changing signs.



=) that would be 1974,

Nixon was out,(watergate 1973)
the GOP was seen as a party of white collar thieves,
1976 election brought in Carter, who is one of the nicest men on earth, but is not a very good decision maker. (great post president.)
1976 was American bicentenniel. that is the last time I remember seeing anywhere near the amount of flags you see now, after the 911 tragedy. the gas shortages brought in a great deal of the environmental laws we have now. Economy cars first became popular with general public.
Mini Series were extrememly popular for a time in those days. you saw the making of roots, V , Armageddon type nuclear flicks.
Nasa launched the first space shuttle Enterprise who landed beautifully at Edwards Airforce base, thus making history conform to fiction, and beginning the era of the space shuttle...which now needs to be upgraded or changed.
The PC
the microwave oven
broke the speed of light
Impulse and plasma research..
laser surgery
Star Wars and Star Wars
We went to the short war format. =) no more Vietnams that last for 10+ years. the strategic strike, the falling of the berlin wall. The intensifying of our mid east relations ... yup, the beginnings of what we have now. Habitat for humanity. Laws protecting homosexuals and protecting women and children from abuse. (would be nice if laws actually worked, but hey, Its a start I suppose) Affirmative action actually got its start with Johnson and Nixon, but gained a great deal of ground in the last 30 years.
That which is considered the occult is being treated with more respect, less burnings at the stake.
okay that is a quick look at last 30 years, from this insiders point of view. I hope pisces treats us with a gentler hand in some ways... though I suspect the breaking of the ice shelfs is NOT a particularly good foreboding. You Brits best keep to high ground and maybe invest in transporting dyke technology from Holland.



Beth wrote:
We went to the short war format.

This is very good, and I know you didn't plagarize, but this is not the first time this observation was made. A man named James Burnham, long dead, wrote a political column he titled The Third World War. Too many readers misunderstood the title thinking he was predicting the third world war, so he changed the name to The Protracted Conflict. Burnham felt that the end of WWII meant the end of what is called total war, and that wars would be fought in various places in short skirimishes (short by comparison to total war). The total war thing only goes back to the 1840s with the advent of the Crimean War and the American Civil War. In these cases the entire economy is geared towards war as it was in WWI and WWII.

Burnham was referring specifically to the conflict between the US and USSR. He died long before the USSR fell. Unfortunately the conflicts are still with us.

Sue wrote:

What I believe it could indicate is the shifting identity of the American people as a nation. Obviously people in the US are not going to wake up on the 2nd Nov and suddenly see themselves as being more Piscean.

This is sad as it would give us American Pisces a jump on things.

I'm old fashioned and I use Jupiter as the ruler of Pisces. Will Americans be more expansive, prosperous, philosophical, religious or will we go to court a lot more often than we do already? Will big clunky shoes remain in style for another 30 years (Gawd I hope not)? Now that Saturn is out, will women stop wearing black everywhere they go? The entire feminine gender in the US looks like its perpetually going to a funeral. Yoo hoo ladies; you look good in other colors, too.

Just some typical male thoughts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Archived Post

Joined: 15 Oct 2003
Posts: 234
Location: Skyscript

Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2003 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AP - This is an archived post, but may still be responded to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated