The Partisan Divide on Issues

[pbrower2a]

(11-13-2020, 12:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 11:36 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 04:53 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(11-08-2020, 04:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-08-2020, 12:44 PM)gabrielle Wrote: Eric's system is based upon the electability of the candidate rather than effectiveness of the elected in office, no? This could be subject to change as American tastes and perceptions change, I would think. After all, some astrologers, including Eric, have been predicting that these years we are living in will see a great paradigm shift, due to rare, once-in-a-millennium configurations. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

My system does change over time. It is based on all the candidates in history and the aspects in their charts. As history continues, the database increases and shifts. Nothing in the stars sets our lives in stone. The horoscope indicates to some degree our character, and character is destiny. I believe character can improve, and that's part of the journey of our unfoldment, in this life, and probably from life to life. Yes, paradigms are slowly shifting-- not as fast as I had hoped when I wrote my first book in 1997 (published the same day as The Fourth Turning), but the rhythms of life and the evolution of humanity and planet Earth go on.

There is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in limited philosophies, whether they be scientific or spiritual. I can make predictions based on trends. The predictions based on the system are not perfect, but they show the significance of our connection to the cosmos around us. In this case, the "stars" are the planets, centered on the Earth-- the most significant planet in astrology.

It is great that Kamala Harris has made history. However, that will not be a sufficient basis on which to nominate her for president in 2024, or any time. The horoscope scores, although not set in stone, have a degree of accuracy that should be heeded. And we can see them at work. The scores indicate which candidates will connect the best with the "soul of America," as Joe Biden puts it. Now with his victory, his score improved a little bit, enough to barely top The Donald's. So I predicted his victory. It was always going to be a close call, and the two candidates had scores close to each other before the election as well as afterward. 

Kamala Harris, however, does not connect well. Her campaign showed this. The Democrats will need to pick someone else if they want to keep the White House. Unless they do, things will be even worse than they are now, and we will have missed the chance in this 4T to make change. 

Only Theodore Roosevelt is certain to have thoroughly beaten his score. 6 other major party candidates, although only 1 since 1932, have also won although having a slightly lower score than their opponent. Other factors were at work too in these 7 cases. But no-one has ever won or served as president with a score as low as Kamala's. American tastes and perceptions will not change that fast. Even so fast as since the 2019-2020 primary campaign! So, be ready to support someone like Mitch Landrieu, who if nominated will surely win. Soon-to-be-I-hope Secretary of State Susan Rice is another good alternative, or Terry McAuliffe.

http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

So, you tweaked Biden's score a bit after he won to go along with your prediction? What's the point of doing that? You're fortunate that the majority of Blue Americans aren't as sharp as the majority of us  these days or the majority of you would be out of business so to speak. It's kind of cool that we are now divided enough to place each other on ignore and no longer care about the outcomes pertaining to each other these days. So, how are you going to get rid of Harris without causing a rift  along racial and gender lines and further  weakening the Democratic party.

In early October I updated my calculations to make them easier to update and for greater accuracy. And I added all the 2020 viable candidates, including Joe Biden assuming his victory. I also calculated what the aspect points and scores would be if Trump were to win instead. Luckily I don't have to go with that scenario. This was all done by Oct.15, and Biden's new score was better than Trump's. Now, after the election, the new scores reflect the new reality that would have been exactly the same had I waited until after the election to develop them. This time, my prediction was right. I didn't have to change a single thing after Biden won.

I don't know how we are going to get rid of Harris. If she had the candidate skills necessary to win on her own, it would not matter what her identity is. But being chosen mainly because she put her hat in the ring in 2019, and has particular identities, it will be a tough cross for Democrats to bear. If she runs it will be a great chance for Tom Cotton or even Trump himself to come back into power, if she is actually nominated. Ironically, maybe the only hope is that Democrats pay attention to my horoscope scores more than folks like you do.

Your minions are in the street holding up signs saying "smash socialism" and crying for civil war. You may get it, but it will be your side that is smashed if you start it. Nothing is more ridiculous than your and your half of America's phobia about "socialism." It is a good and necessary, if not sufficient, approach, and no other country is obsessed with hating it. Our rugged, reaganoid individualism is our biggest problem, and you guys are our biggest obstacle to progress in America.

Our side wants a mixed economy, which is what we already have, but maybe a bit more (like health care for all). We want freedom for entrepreneurs, as long as they obey regulations which they should obey voluntarily anyway. Pay your workers a fair and living wage. Approve of higher taxes on the wealthy, and rid yourselves of the delusion that the benefits of not doing this will trickle down. Trickle down don't trickle. It tinkles. Get over your ancient ideologies and you and the country will be MUCH happier. Go ahead and ignore my advice as you always do. We'll fight it out and may the best side win.

As I've mentioned before, oil and water doesn't mix and the Democratic side is going to find that out soon enough. Right now, I'm in the mix but not as not as heavily into the mix as the capitalist Democratic supporters who live in California or New York or Illinois these days. Minnesota is mainly capitalist these days. Third World Omar doesn't represent Minnesota/American values and the Democratic supporters who fear her and the segment of society she represents don't represent them either. I feel sorry for that group being they're in a similar position as the Jews/ moderate people of Europe. Like I said, this is going to boil to the Left vs Hard Core America so I hope your ready for a repeat of World War II here buddy. I don't really care who kills you or what kills you, I just know that I'm speaking to a dead man right now and speaking to a bunch of wishful thinkers with cozy blues lives who are going to find themselves being severely impacted one way or another. Do you know who I am. I'm the Devil are far as your concerned and I'm cool with that distinction buddy.

"Third World Omar" is in Minnesota, and not Somalia. She made a choice, and she ended up in a place very different from Somalia  -- even in climate.




(as you will notice, Somalia is mostly hot desert and secondarily hot semi-desert, with a pair of small areas with tropical savanna. Minnesota has real winters everywhere, and places in Minnesota such as the Twin Cities and Mankato are just warm enough in the summer to require air conditioners for optimal comfort. But you don't have to go to the Third World to experience hot desert (Phoenix, Tucson, Palm Springs, Bakersfield, Las Vegas, and arguably El Paso or St. George, Utah will suffice) or hot steppe (Lancaster, California, or Midland or Odessa in Texas). Tropical savanna? South Florida... Key West is surprisingly dry). 

Of course America is as capitalist as it can be, considering that Big Business mucks up so much and demands so much that America needs Big Government just to meet the needs of Big Business for human capital (a skilled workforce) and infrastructure such as streets and sewers and courts of laws for deciding disputes and judging the most blatant miscreants. If you want to live where there is no government... well, there is Somalia. Plenty of guns, and the culture is clearly male-chauvinist. Of course, where government is weak, lynching is the style. That is ugly. 

Considering that with the distinctions of class, region, ethnicity, religious heritage, and sexual orientation that already exist, there are plenty of possible ways to be an American. Get this clear: a gay male, middle-class, Japanese-American Buddhist-Shinto fusion in California is just as American as a straight, female, economically-wrecked, Christian Protestant fundamentalist in West Virginia. Those two people may have only two things in common: that they are both Americans with light skin color. This is one of the most important realities in America, and when we all understand this we are well on the way to solving the divisions that some ruthless, amoral people have sought to impose and exploit for questionable purposes.   Difference is legitimate because it is unavoidable and inevitable. Need I calculate the permutations of ways in which it is possible to be an American? 

Violent schism? Welcome to Somalia, a place that "Third World Omar" fled.  

Need I tell you about Dearborn, Michigan again? It's a reasonably good place to live if you have some family values, but a place to leave immediately if you are a whore, pimp, drunk, druggie, or criminal. Better the mosque than the whorehouse. It has one of the largest percentages of Muslims in a small city in America, and it is far more livable than the abutting southwest side of Detroit, a moral cesspool of alcoholism, drugs, prostitution, and sexually-oriented businesses. I am secular -- but I am not that sort of secular. 

Yes, I have very conservative family values, and I believe in law and order as necessary for a civil society. I am for LGBT rights because those are more compatible with law and order and family values than is their denial. As a serial adulterer who has ditched wives for newer models and who has had an affair with someone in the 'sexual entertainment business' to whom he has paid hush money, and a sleazy operator in business and politics, Donald Trump offends my sensibilities.