It's in the "stars" (predicting by astrology and other means)

[Eric the Green]

(12-14-2016, 11:22 AM)Anthony Wrote:

(12-12-2016, 01:41 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(12-11-2016, 02:26 PM)Anthony Wrote: The "perihelion/oppositions" of Mars and the Sun are never absolutely exact; but twice every 32 years they are as near as makes no difference to being exact, causing Mars to shine at a brightness exceeding -2.0 magnitude.  

But do you have any source to verify this perihelion Mars? How did you learn about it? Who says?

I'm quite sure Daniel Patrick Moynihan would never have thought the Tea Party were not laissez faireists. Do you know what the TEA stands for in their name? They are the most outspoken and militant laissez faireists that we have. I don't understand how you could get that confused.

I trust that this link will satisfy your criteria:

The 2020-21 Perihelic Appartion Of Mars

As for your second issue, having the government intentionally create labor shortages to drive up wages by cutting off immigration is not laissez-faire.  Government slapping prohibitive tariffs on foreign-made goods is not laissez faire, and is what the antebellum North favored and the antebellum South vehemently opposed.

The only difference between Donald Trump's approach and that of Bernie Sanders is that the former does not entail transfer payments.

Thanks, I'll check out your reference.

OK, that tells me about October 2020, the perihelion happens a week before the opposition; although this is not compared to 1860 or other years.

Immigration is completely irrelevant to the laissez faire economics issue. For you to throw that in all the time completely confuses the issue. This is culture war, xenophobia and social conservatism; blaming problems on outsiders. Cutting off immigration (especially the illegal kind only, as Trump says he wants to do) would only create some labor shortages among very low-paid workers. That will not drive up wages. Immigration stimulates growth.

Tariffs are not laissez faire, of course, but Trump does not make himself into Bernie Sanders on that one issue alone. He is the antithesis of Bernie Sanders on everything else. Letting business get off without regulation and taxes is the essence of laissez faire. Trump's appointments and pronouncements indicate he is all in on laissez faire. He is the most famous member of the oligarchy, and that's who he protects and promotes, exclusively.

[Eric the Green]

A portion of my latest historic "who scored what" list. More at the website:
http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

Elections from 1932 to 2012:
1932: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-5 U, Herbert Hoover 11-12*
1936: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-5 U*, Alf Landon 10-17
1940: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-5 U*, Wendell Wilkie 8-9
1944: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-5 U, Thomas Dewey 8-5 SN
1948: Harry Truman 15-0, Thomas Dewey 8-5 SN
1952: Dwight Eisenhower 17-8, Adlai Stevenson 5-20
1856: Dwight Eisenhower 17-8, Adlai Stevenson 5-20*
1960: John F Kennedy 13-6, Richard Nixon 18-7
1964: Lyndon Johnson 8-6 J*, Barry Goldwater 20-10** (he had Mars in Scorpio rising, with inharmonious aspects: the perfect symbol of his stubborn "extremism")
1968: Richard Nixon 18-7*, Hubert Humphrey 9-5**, George Wallace 2-7 J (+ Mars rising)
1972: Richard Nixon 18-7*, George McGovern 9-10
1976: Jimmy Carter 12-4, Gerald Ford 12-8
1980: Ronald Reagan 21-6, Jimmy Carter 12-4*, John Anderson 14-8 J*
1984: Ronald Reagan 21-6, Walter Mondale 12-10 J/U*
1988: George H W Bush 14-6, Michael Dukakis 2-12*
1992: Bill Clinton 21-2 J, George H W Bush 14-6, Ross Perot 7-12 (his Jupiter rising is evident, but it was 10 degrees above his ascendant, so I didn't count it officially)
1996: Bill Clinton 21-2 J, Bob Dole 12-19
2000: George W Bush 17-2*, Al Gore 10-8 (Mars rising)
2004: George W Bush 17-2*, John Kerry 8-13 (his score was much weaker in the revised system)
2008: Barack Obama 19-2, John McCain 15-13
2012: Barack Obama 19-2, Mitt Romney 4-9 U, SN
2016: Donald Trump 9-4 (Mars rising), Hillary Rodham Clinton 9-11 J

J = Jupiter rising in birth chart (big advantage). U = Uranus rising in birth chart (small advantage). SN = Saturn at the Nadir in birth chart (big disadvantage).
* Saturn Return ** Saturn Return before opponent. Big disadvantage. If it occurs in election year or first 3 years after election, loss all but certain. In 4th year (potential re-election year), loss possible; big disaster and/or destroyed presidency all but certain. Since 1932: FDR, Johnson, Nixon and Bush all had a Saturn Return in the 4th (re-election) year.

Highest Republican actual and potential candidate scores with no Saturn return due: Donald Trump 9-4, Ivanka Trump 16-0, Carly Fiorina 16-7, George Pataki 15-3.

Democratic potential or actual candidates 2012-2016 (or later)
Hillary Clinton, 9-11 J
Martin O'Malley, 11-19
Joe Biden, 13-8
Elizabeth Warren, 8-7
Bernie Sanders, 14-7
Jim Webb, 11-7
Tim Kaine, 11-11
Michelle Obama, 6-6
Andrew Cuomo, 11-6*
Cory Booker, 6-7
Zephyr Teachout, 4-10
Joe Manchin, 6-10
Howard Dean, 6-9 U
Janet Napolitano, 11-5*
Tammy Baldwin, 13-6
Jason Carter, 10-3
Joe & Julian Castro, 8-13
Terry McAuliffe, 11-2*
Gavin Newsom, 8-2 U
Antonio Villaraigosa, 15-6
Lincoln Chafee, 15-9
Sherrod Brown, 19-8
Tulsi Gabbard, 11-6
Tom Vilsack, 15-6
Jack Markell, 14-9
Chuck Schumer, 15-8
Debbie Stabenow, 8-3
Mark Zuckerberg (party unknown), 12-9
George Clooney, 11-17
Oprah Winfrey, 10-5
Chelsea Clinton, 9-5 U

More candidate scores will be added.

Best scores, with no Saturn Return: Bernie Sanders 14-7, Jason Carter 10-3, Gavin Newsom 8-2, Antonio Villaraigosa, 15-6, Tom Vilsack, 15-6, Oprah Winfrey, 10-5. Sherrod Brown has the highest positive number, and a good score: 19-8.

Other potential Democratic candidates with good scores, with no Saturn Return after 2020: Janet Napolitano 11-5, Terry McAuliffe 11-2. Tammy Baldwin (13-6) will have a Saturn Return for the election of 2020, and Gavin Newsom (8-2) for 2024. Late-night TV political comic Seth Meyers has indicated no interest in running, but if he did, he'd have a 20-4 score going for him. Another media personality with a good score is documentary producer Michael Moore, 16-8, and Oprah Winfrey has 10-5. Stephen Colbert has a high positive number and a score of 20-11. Maybe another celebrity can save us!

*Saturn return due between 2016 and 2020

[Anthony '58]

With Roy Cooper now certified as the winner of the governor's race in North Carolina, if I had my way it would come down to him vs. Andrew Cuomo for the Democratic nomination for POTUS in 2020.

Maybe you can supply us with Cooper's score?

And if Trump fails to keep his promises to the "white middle class," he will be toast - quite possibly in the Republican primary.

[Eric the Green]

(12-16-2016, 09:59 AM)Anthony Wrote: With Roy Cooper now certified as the winner of the governor's race in North Carolina, if I had my way it would come down to him vs. Andrew Cuomo for the Democratic nomination for POTUS in 2020.

Maybe you can supply us with Cooper's score?

And if Trump fails to keep his promises to the "white middle class," he will be toast - quite possibly in the Republican primary.

Maybe. I don't know what they'll do; but he's already broken those promises to them, and mostly they were harmful to them to begin with. It's a matter of whether the "white middle class" gets some semblance of good sense again, which they so frequently lose.

Right now it looks like Cooper has a 10-4 score, pending a more accurate score if birth time is known, or if I change the point scoring on the aspects again, as I am considering doing (he could have another negative point if that happens). Right now I am leaning against making any more changes.

That's one point better than Donald Trump, if he is nominated and runs again. Balanced against that are the new moon before election, which predicts that the incumbent party will win the popular vote, and the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction (which you know about) which portends a change of direction within the Establishment (in the past this has meant a party in power loss, death in office of whoever is elected, or both). Cooper's past a Saturn Return now for the 2020 election, so that's a clear path for him now.

I like the idea of a Cooper running, though, since I am a Cooper on my grandmother's side. But Roy Cooper will have a tough time; the GOP is trying to strip his power. If they succeed it will be hard for him to build a record to run on in time. Interestingly, he's going through his Saturn Return right now. So we'll see how he comes out of this crisis.

[Eric the Green]

(12-14-2016, 06:21 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: A portion of my latest historic "who scored what" list. More at the website:
http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

Elections from 1932 to 2012:
1932: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-4 U, Herbert Hoover 11-11*
1936: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-4 U*, Alf Landon 10-16
1940: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-4 U*, Wendell Wilkie 8-9
1944: Franklin D Roosevelt 21-4 U, Thomas Dewey 8-6 SN
1948: Harry Truman 14-0, Thomas Dewey 8-6 SN
1952: Dwight Eisenhower 17-8, Adlai Stevenson 5-21
1856: Dwight Eisenhower 17-8, Adlai Stevenson 5-21*
1960: John F Kennedy 13-6, Richard Nixon 18-7
1964: Lyndon Johnson 8-6 J*, Barry Goldwater 20-11** (he had Mars in Scorpio rising, with inharmonious aspects: the perfect symbol of his stubborn "extremism")
1968: Richard Nixon 18-7*, Hubert Humphrey 9-5**, George Wallace 2-7 J (+ Mars rising)
1972: Richard Nixon 18-7*, George McGovern 9-10
1976: Jimmy Carter 12-4, Gerald Ford 12-8
1980: Ronald Reagan 21-6, Jimmy Carter 12-4*, John Anderson 14-8 J*
1984: Ronald Reagan 21-6, Walter Mondale 12-12 J/U*
1988: George H W Bush 14-6, Michael Dukakis 2-10*
1992: Bill Clinton 21-3 J, George H W Bush 14-6, Ross Perot 7-10 (his Jupiter rising is evident, but it was 10 degrees above his ascendant, so I didn't count it officially)
1996: Bill Clinton 21-3 J, Bob Dole 12-19
2000: George W Bush 17-2*, Al Gore 10-9 (Mars rising)
2004: George W Bush 17-2*, John Kerry 8-12 (his score was much weaker in the revised system)
2008: Barack Obama 19-2, John McCain 15-13
2012: Barack Obama 19-2, Mitt Romney 4-10 U, SN
2016: Donald Trump 9-4 (Mars rising), Hillary Rodham Clinton 9-11 J

J = Jupiter rising in birth chart (big advantage). U = Uranus rising in birth chart (small advantage). SN = Saturn at the Nadir in birth chart (disadvantage).
* Saturn Return ** Saturn Return before opponent. Big disadvantage. If it occurs in election year or first 3 years after election, loss all but certain. In 4th year (potential re-election year), loss possible; big disaster and/or destroyed presidency all but certain. Since 1932: FDR, Johnson, Nixon and Bush all had a Saturn Return in the 4th (re-election) year.

Highest Republican actual and potential candidate scores with no Saturn return due: Donald Trump 9-4, Ivanka Trump 16-2, Carly Fiorina 16-7, George Pataki 15-3. Our future "energy secretary" Rick Perry looks a little better at 11-8.

Democratic potential or actual candidates 2012-2016 (or later)
Hillary Clinton, 9-11 J
Martin O'Malley, 11-19
Joe Biden, 13-8
Elizabeth Warren, 8-7
Bernie Sanders, 14-7
Jim Webb, 11-7
Tim Kaine, 11-11
Michelle Obama, 6-6
Andrew Cuomo, 11-6*
Cory Booker, 6-7
Zephyr Teachout, 4-10
Joe Manchin, 6-10
Howard Dean, 6-8 U
Janet Napolitano, 11-5*
Tammy Baldwin, 13-6
Jason Carter, 10-4
Joe & Julian Castro, 8-13
Terry McAuliffe, 11-2*
Gavin Newsom, 8-1 U
Antonio Villaraigosa, 15-5
Lincoln Chafee, 15-9
Sherrod Brown, 19-8
Tulsi Gabbard, 11-6
Tom Vilsack, 15-6
Jack Markell, 14-9
Chuck Schumer, 15-8
Debbie Stabenow, 8-3
Roy Cooper, 10-4
Mark Zuckerberg (party unknown), 12-9
George Clooney, 11-17
Oprah Winfrey, 10-3
Chelsea Clinton, 9-5 U

More candidate scores will be added. Other scores are available at my website: http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

Best scores, with no Saturn Return: Bernie Sanders 14-7, Gavin Newsom 8-1, Antonio Villaraigosa, 15-5, Tom Vilsack, 15-6, Oprah Winfrey, 10-3, Jason Carter 10-4, Roy Cooper, 10-4. Sherrod Brown has the highest positive number, and a good score: 19-8.

Other potential Democratic candidates with good scores, with no Saturn Return after 2020: Janet Napolitano 11-5, Terry McAuliffe 11-2. Tammy Baldwin (13-6) will have a Saturn Return for the election of 2020, and Gavin Newsom (8-1) for 2024. Late-night TV political comic Seth Meyers has indicated no interest in running, but if he did, he'd have a 20-3 score going for him. Another media personality with a good score is documentary producer Michael Moore, 16-6, and Oprah Winfrey has 10-3. Stephen Colbert has a high positive number and a score of 20-11. Maybe another celebrity can save us!

*Saturn return due between 2016 and 2020

I decided to drop Sun square/opposite Saturn as an unfavorable aspect, and put Moon square/opposite Mars in instead. Sun-Saturn is notable as an aspect of presidents during crisis and 4T periods. 

So a few changes happened. Some show-biz candidates benefited from this change, suggesting they might appeal as 4T candidates. Seth Meyers looks even better at 20-3, and Oprah is now 10-3. Michael Moore improved to 16-6. Also, the CA governor candidates Gavin Newsom and Antonio Villaraigosa look better too. But Gavin has a Saturn Return due for the 2024 election, so he would do better to wait until after then, and serve a full 2 terms as governor if he's elected.

Meanwhile Ivanka Trump's score went back down a little, though still very high at 16-2, because she has that moody Moon-Mars aspect.

Hey, with Seth Meyers at 20-3 (birth time still unknown), maybe it's time for a "closer look" at Seth!

[Eric the Green]

Am I looking for hope for 2020? Maybe. But I did notice something recently that's got me thinking.

There's a new monkey-wrench in the works. Uranus is the planet of unexpected events. As I mentioned in my article, when Uranus is at the Nadir of the New Moon chart, the place where the Sun is at Midnight, a "revolution" can topple the party in power. But, astrologers use different methods for calculating a horoscope. Some use what's called the "equal house" system, in which the houses of the horoscope are measured equally in 30-degree segments from the Ascendant. And all astrologers agree that a strong square angle to the Ascendant is significant. In 2016, Uranus was square to the Ascendant from below the horizon, but in the 3rd house instead of the 4th next to it, and not at the Nadir point. Yet, the 2016 election was something of an unexpected revolution against "the Establishment," or at least those who voted for Trump thought that's what they were voting for.

This has never happened before. And Trump is himself certainly a wild card; perhaps even a visitor from the Twilight Zone. Being unprepared for the presidency, and bent on an extremely reactionary course, his actions are likely to be disruptive, and possibly destructive and dangerous. When Uranus is involved, astrologers know that we can expect the unexpected.

But here's an added wrinkle! Although Uranus had never been in this position before in any election, this will also happen in 2020. At the New Moon before the Election, Uranus will be square to the Ascendant again from below the horizon, from the 3rd house, for only the second time ever. Plus, Uranus is also the ruler of the Ascendant in this chart, because Aquarius is rising. That means it represents the challenging party too. Being below the horizon, with the ruler of the party in power above the horizon and higher in the sky, this normally means that the challenger would lose. But these are not normal times. In 2020, Uranus squaring the Ascendant from below the horizon could topple the party in power again.

Being an unprecedented situation, it is no basis for a firm prediction. And it probably won't happen unless the Democratic candidate has a better score than Trump's. That means according to my latest count, that the Democratic nominee must have a better score proportionally than Trump's 9-4 score, if Trump runs again. In order to win, the Democrats have to nominate a candidate who knows how to appeal to the American people. (S)he must also be at the right age (that is, not between 55 and 59 inclusive, meaning Saturn Return not due), and (s)he could benefit from Jupiter rising.

There is also the possibility that Trump could be impeached and removed from office, because he often plays fast and loose with the law. If and when this could happen will be something for astrologers to look at in the 4 years after Jan.20, 2017. And if this happens, and Pence is the Republican candidate in 2020, his 8-7 score is easier to beat! Trump may also decline to run for a second term. Jupiter is also making its next conjunction to Saturn in Dec.2020, which means a change of direction within the Establishment. This time, it is also aligned with transformative Pluto, and in the sign Aquarius for the first time in 600 years. This is the next factor I look at in my article. Meanwhile, let's summarize the outlook for the New Moon before the Election in the future.

Indications for 2016 and beyond for the new moon before election:
2016: party in power wins (popular vote win) (Uranus square the Ascendant; possible "revolution" indicator)
2020: party in power wins (Uranus square the Ascendant; possible "revolution" indicator)
2024: challenger wins
2028: party in power
2032: challenger
2036: party in power
2040: party in power (close, 5 1/2 degrees difference)
2044: "revolution" possible, favoring challenger (party in power ruler is higher, but Uranus is in 4th house and square the Ascendant)
2048: party in power
2052: challenger
2056: challenger
2060: party in power
2064: party in power

[Eric the Green]

(12-09-2016, 06:22 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I predicted Hillary would win based on a couple of items regarding her horoscope, based on a questionable birth time. But I used it partly because it favored her to win. I was hoping I still think the birth chart I chose to use is correct, based on the preponderance of evidence as described here:

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Clinton,_Hillary

But now with my additional checking and tallying, as well as switching Trump's and Clinton's aspects between winner and loser, I come up with an actual negative score for Hillary, and no candidate has ever won with a negative score unless the opponent had an equal or more negative score. So, it's partly in hindsight because I factored a Hillary win into how I scored the aspects in their charts within my database, which I should not have done.

Yes, Eric makes mistakes. But ironically, the systems I discovered did not. So, they will be useful going forward.

The only three candidates to win with a negative score were John Adams (6-7), Theodore Roosevelt (12-15) and James Garfield (8-9).

James Garfield beat Winfield Scott Hancock in 1880. Garfield had a horoscope score of 8-9 and Hancock 9-8 in my latest count. It was the closest election in history by popular vote.

Calvin Coolidge beat John W. Davis in 1924. Coolidge scored 10-9, while Davis scored 8-16. Also running was Robert LaFollette who scored 6-14. Not even close. Neither was the election.

Herbert Hoover beat Al Smith in 1928. Hoover scored 11-11, while Smith scored 4-16. Again, not close. It was a landslide. Hoover went on to lose to FDR in 1932, who had a 21-4 score. Another landslide.

So, in my new count, Donald Trump has 9-4 and Hillary 9-11. She lost. In my previous version this year, it was Trump 8-4, Hillary 12-9. Last year, using my 2004 system, I had it as Trump 15-4 vs. Hillary 9-8.

My revised article is up.
http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

Scores revised in this previous post.

[Eric the Green]

One of the best Democratic prospects for 2020: Sherrod Brown (score at least 19 to no more than 8)





https://youtu.be/BcxyT001R2o

https://youtu.be/un-IuLRcptk

[Eric the Green]

I imagine if he runs he'll have to work to keep his voice smooth.

[Marypoza]

What about Tulsi? What's her score?

[Eric the Green]

(12-27-2016, 04:52 PM)Marypoza Wrote: What about Tulsi? What's her score?

I'd give her an outside shot; her score is 11-6; same as Andrew Cuomo. That's not quite higher than Trump though. I could not predict that she would win, but she might. That's about what I am saying for Sanders.

Too bad I can't support Tulsi, because of her deceptive and cruel approach to Syria. But, if she's the nominee, I might....

Her chart so far (birth time unknown), with many aspects to Neptune, shows a visionary, crusading, romantic idealist; maybe too utopian for Americans. She is attractive and harmonious, but also sometimes overly-aggressive. She is articulate in expressing her views, and good with the media. She is a policy wonk, like Hillary (but Hillary recently lost the positive points she got for that Mercury-Saturn aspect, and therefore, so does Tulsi). She has the popular hero aspect (Jupiter sextile Uranus), and already has attracted attention as that; and she has good strategic abilities.

[Eric the Green]

The New Moon before election chart is basic to my prediction method. This year it predicted a win for the party in power, but in cases where the popular vote conflicted with the electoral, the new moon always predicted the popular vote winner. It happened again.

The rule is, the Ascendant is the challenger, the Descendant is the party in power (AC. is the horizontal line going left, the DC. to the right). The planet RULING the Ascendant sign shows the fortunes of the challenger, and the RULING planet of the Descendant shows the fortunes of the party in power or "champ." Whichever ruler is higher in the sky relative to the horizon, will win the popular vote.

If you can see this chart, you'll see Capricorn is rising (Ascendant), and Cancer is setting (Descendant). The ruling planet of Cancer is the Moon, and it was higher in the sky than the ruling planet of Capricorn, Saturn.



The amazing thing about this new moon chart before the 2016 election, is how much it resembles the candidates' charts! I have never noticed such a thing before. The Ascendant side resembles Trump's own horoscope. Mars was just above the Ascendant (you can see the biological symbol for male there, that also represents the planet Mars), just like in Trump's chart. And a little bit higher, you can see Saturn (AC. ruler) in conjunction with Venus, just like in Trump's chart. Higher still, you can see the Moon, conjunct the Sun of course, in Scorpio, the same as Hillary's Sun in Scorpio, along with Mercury in Scorpio, just like Hillary.

Mars and Capricorn/Saturn its ruler represent Trump perfectly; the old man, the patriarchy, misogyny, aggression, anger, while Cancer and the Moon is the feminine, the first female nominee, nurturing, compassionate towards the people, but less dynamic....

You can also see the new wrinkle. I have noticed before that Uranus at the Nadir indicates in the New Moon chart that the party in power is toppled. That has worked 4 out of 5 times in history. But this time, Uranus was square the Ascendant, near the Nadir (IC) but not AT the Nadir. So I kind of glossed over this. Uranus square the Ascendant, but not at the Nadir or in the 4th house, has never been significant before, and in fact has never happened before (in a New Moon before Election chart). But some astrologers say that a square to the Ascendant below the horizon is like the Nadir. They use the "equal house" system. So Uranus there may have indicated the party in power toppled; just not so clear-cut. And the wrinkle is this; for just the second time ever, this will happen again in 2020! So, the party in power could be toppled again, if this pattern holds, even though again the party in power's ruler will be higher. I'll probably post the 2020 chart too, if it's possible (see below). I don't know if this will happen, but at least the indication that the party in power will win in 2020 is now in doubt.

Whereas the rebel against the party in power in 2016 had a Mars quality, because Mars was rising and square to Uranus. In 2020, if a topple happens, it will have a Mercurial quality, and Mercury may be rising in the chart of the challenger, just as it was in Hillary's chart. Or something like this could happen. That's because Mercury opposes Uranus in the 2020 chart. And Uranus is itself also the ruler of the rising sign, Aquarius, the challenger's ruling sign.

[Eric the Green]

Here's the New Moon before Election for Oct 16, 2020.



You can see Aquarius rising (on AC), with its ruler Uranus squaring the AC. from below, but not at the Nadir (opposite the MC), with Mercury opposing it high in the chart, squaring the AC. from above. The Sun, ruler of the DC. sign Leo (Trump's AC. sign), is higher in the sky than Uranus, indicating a party in power victory, unless Uranus upsets the applecart as it did in 2016.

Does this mean that the challenger will have Aquarian and Mercurial qualities indicated in his or her chart? That will be something to watch in the charts of prospective candidates in 2020. It will of course be fortunate for the challenger if (s)he also has a higher score than Trump's 9-4 score.

You can see that the Sun opposes Mars, as Anthony has mentioned for this date, meaning a war may be on the horizon somewhere. And both are squaring Jupiter, Saturn and Pluto as they line up. Momentous indications of a change in direction in The Establishment for the 2020s.

Just taking a look at a few contenders now known who have high horoscope scores, Terry McAuliffe, the Clinton friend, is an Aquarius with Mercury opposite Uranus, so he would fit the bill best for resembling the 2020 New Moon chart's challenger. But, it's too early to say who will actually run. Sanders is notable too for having a Mercury-Uranus trine aspect in his chart, and Michael Moore for a square. Sherrod Brown is a Scorpio with Sun trine Uranus.






McAuliffe, he looks and sounds pretty good!

It's known that he has some Clinton-like problems. But he can speak well, and maybe he gets results too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_McAuliffe

His score is 11-2, but if he was born in the morning, his score could go up 2 or 3 points.

[Eric the Green]

Here is The Donald's horoscope. See the striking resemblance to the New Moon before Election chart for 2016. Mars just above the Ascendant (AC), with Pluto (PL) just above it; a bit higher, you can see Venus with Saturn, and then higher still we see Mercury and then the Sun, all just like in the New Moon chart. Uranus is with the Sun showing Trump's ability to upset the applecart. Most of the planets on the Left also resembles the New Moon chart (this is the symbol of a "self-starter" focused on one's own agenda). Notice also his exact Jupiter trine to Uranus, the aspect of the "popular hero" according to planetary aspect expert Charles Carter, author of The Astrological Aspects (still available).



http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Trump,_Donald

[naf140230]

(12-28-2016, 07:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: You can also see the new wrinkle. I have noticed before that Uranus at the Nadir indicates in the New Moon chart that the party in power is toppled. That has worked 4 out of 5 times in history. But this time, Uranus was square the Ascendant, near the Nadir (IC) but not AT the Nadir. So I kind of glossed over this. Uranus square the Ascendant, but not at the Nadir or in the 4th house, has never been significant before, and in fact has never happened before (in a New Moon before Election chart). But some astrologers say that a square to the Ascendant below the horizon is like the Nadir. They use the "equal house" system. So Uranus there may have indicated the party in power toppled; just not so clear-cut. And the wrinkle is this; for just the second time ever, this will happen again in 2020! So, the party in power could be toppled again, if this pattern holds, even though again the party in power's ruler will be higher. I'll probably post the 2020 chart too, if it's possible (see below). I don't know if this will happen, but at least the indication that the party in power will win in 2020 is now in doubt.

Whereas the rebel against the party in power in 2016 had a Mars quality, because Mars was rising and square to Uranus. In 2020, if a topple happens, it will have a Mercurial quality, and Mercury may be rising in the chart of the challenger, just as it was in Hillary's chart. Or something like this could happen. That's because Mercury opposes Uranus in the 2020 chart. And Uranus is itself also the ruler of the rising sign, Aquarius, the challenger's ruling sign.

That is what I like to hear.

[Eric the Green]

It was very unusual to see a new moon before the election that so starkly resembled the charts of the nominees. I don't know if that's a new trend; if so it might bode well for Terry McAuliffe, whose chart most resembles the 2020 new moon before election. Sometimes I can see some slight resemblances in past elections to candidates, like Mars in Virgo rising for 2000 (Dubya had that sign position of Mars). Click on the link in my previous post to see Trump's chart and how similar it is to this new moon chart, or see below the new moon charts.

Let's see if I can retrieve that New Moon Oct 30 2016 chart:







Note Pluto in Leo above Mars; different symbol above (circle above crescent above cross) from the new moon chart's use of the PL glyph for Pluto.

[Eric the Green]

Prospective chart for Terry McAuliffe (birth time unknown; 12 Noon is used)

[Eric the Green]

It is interesting to keep in mind which sign Neptune is in, when understanding whether we are 4T or not, when it began, etc. Neptune is the planet that carries with it our collective soul as it travels through the zodiac; it signifies the zeitgeist. In Pisces, as it was from 1848 to 1861, and now since 2011-2012, Neptune represents a world soul adrift; not well tethered and very muddled. It corresponds to a 4T in which things are dissolving and falling apart. That's what Pisces is about. Action follows in Aries. So dissolution is followed by action. A 4T in Pisces might not seem as much of a 4T yet, because things happen in a more hidden and inchoate way under Pisces. As is well-known too, in late Pisces things are beginning to boil over.

And not only will the beginning of this 4T be controversial because of this, so will the ending of it. Just as some say that the civil war 4T ended in 1865, but some say in 1868 or even later; so will the end of this 4T be, because Neptune will continue in Aries, and things will still be in an uproar even as the 1T begins that's supposed to bring consensus. Things will be established for a new saeculum, but it might not seem like it, because the fires of activity will still be burning, and the controversies of the 4T will be continuing, even though the worst of it will be over. Look for 1865 to 1886, not 1946 to 1964.

[naf140230]

(01-01-2017, 12:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: It was very unusual to see a new moon before the election that so starkly resembled the charts of the nominees. I don't know if that's a new trend; if so it might bode well for Terry McAuliffe, whose chart most resembles the 2020 new moon before election. Sometimes I can see some slight resemblances in past elections to candidates, like Mars in Virgo rising for 2000 (Dubya had that sign position of Mars). Click on the link in my previous post to see Trump's chart and how similar it is to this new moon chart, or see below the new moon charts.

Let's see if I can retrieve that New Moon Oct 30 2016 chart:







Note Pluto in Leo above Mars; different symbol above (circle above crescent above cross) from the new moon chart's use of the PL glyph for Pluto.

Have there been others like it?

[naf140230]

(01-03-2017, 12:13 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: It is interesting to keep in mind which sign Neptune is in, when understanding whether we are 4T or not, when it began, etc. Neptune is the planet that carries with it our collective soul as it travels through the zodiac; it signifies the zeitgeist. In Pisces, as it was from 1848 to 1861, and now since 2011-2012, Neptune represents a world soul adrift; not well tethered and very muddled. It corresponds to a 4T in which things are dissolving and falling apart. That's what Pisces is about. Action follows in Aries. So dissolution is followed by action. A 4T in Pisces might not seem as much of a 4T yet, because things happen in a more hidden and inchoate way under Pisces. As is well-known too, in late Pisces things are beginning to boil over.

And not only will the beginning of this 4T be controversial because of this, so will the ending of it. Just as some say that the civil war 4T ended in 1865, but some say in 1868 or even later; so will the end of this 4T be, because Neptune will continue in Aries, and things will still be in an uproar even as the 1T begins that's supposed to bring consensus. Things will be established for a new saeculum, but it might not seem like it, because the fires of activity will still be burning, and the controversies of the 4T will be continuing, even though the worst of it will be over. Look for 1865 to 1886, not 1946 to 1964.

I think the Glorious Revolution is similar, too.