Yes, I got it wrong! And, yes, I think it did have something to do with my own political biases

I was interested by, and in agreement with, Mark F's comments

And I think it's better to use astrology to find ways to help yourself in your own life

and

I am increasingly seeing astrology as a spiritual tool and predicting elections is not part of my path

As I say, I do agree with these comments. However, what I would say is that, for me, looking at Mundane charts, horaries, any form of astrological chart that has a verifiable outcome is extremely interesting. Because there is an outcome you can test your own knowledge and ability to work with astrology, there is 'evidence' that you were successful in getting to the essential 'meaning' of the chart. This relates back to my point of being biased - if we can be biased in something like a presidential election chart which isn't absolutely of critical importance to us then imagine how biased it is possible to be with our own natal charts, or horaries or events that do link personally to our lives. I think, therefore, that by practising our art on any charts that inspire us at any level and especially where our judgement can be tested that it is always useful to take the chance to see what we can get from the chart.

In this manner, when we know what happened, we can see where we went wrong and work out ways of avoiding that in the future...... and if we are working with charts for our own personal development (particularly our spiritual development) then surely we want to see what the chart is telling us, rather than what we think we want to see. I think that if we want to use astrology for our own guidance and development we need to see what the astrology is saying to us, rather than trying to make it fit our own ideas of what we think is right, and I can't think of any other way of doing this other than 'testing' ourselves with charts that have some kind of outcome.

I don't know if this makes sense, or if the meaning of what I am trying to express is clear - I hope so!

As I say, I do agree with these comments. However, what I would say is that, for me, looking at Mundane charts, horaries, any form of astrological chart that has a verifiable outcome is extremely interesting.

You know I actually agree with that. While I wouldn't ask a question about an election myself, it is interesting to read a chart after somene else has presented say an even chart, or a candidate's progressed chart. Just like at first I saw people doing all these charts on celebrities, my first reaction was "Who cares about Michael Jackson?" Then I realized that it's great practice for learning.

It might be interesting to look back at the disputed 2000 election, or maybe to the 1980 election when Reagan replaced Jimmy Carter in a landlslide. I don't think there seems to be agreement in this forum as to what approach to take. Even for elctions in the future, horary doesn't seem to be right because chances are that we aren't the first person to ask the question. (What did Lilly use for his political predictions?) And an event chart would he hard to use given that elections by their nature happen over a huge stretch of terrain. So maybe be default the best way is comparing progressed natal charts, or as Deb suggested comparing a candidate's chart with a nations chart. But wouldn't we also want to prgress America's national chart from 1776 up to 2004 too?

It must be asked: Why do we need to predict at all? Not only in world matters, but in our own lives. Prediction seems to play on two main factors: fear and a need to feel in control. And then there is the ego gratification of being able to say that you saw ?it? coming. Whether we admit it to ourselves or not, we tremble before transits and foreseen (?) events. In horary I have seen far too many questions in the spirit of ?Should I...?? and ?Will he...?? which have prevented me from studying horary interpretation. I see these questions (and my own running to look up transits) and ask myself ?Why am I doing this??. What am I looking for? What am I running away from? Instead of certainty, maybe it?s best to find ways to step into uncertainty. It seems to me that much of the squabbling in the astrology world has been over the correct way to produce accurate predictions; differences over natal techniques don?t seem to produce as many battles. And worse than the arguing are the swollen egos.

I am not giving up my peeking at transits and I may yet study horary, but I will try to always remember to ask myself ?Why am I doing this??.

However, using astrology to look back is fascinating and useful. The link of Cancerian Bush and Cancerian USA and the transit of Saturn in Cancer tells much about what has been going on. And I PREDICT that Saturn in Leo will be different. After all, Bush does have that Ascendant, Mercury and Pluto conjunction in Leo. Maybe there?s a local chapter of Predictors Anonymous I can join.

[But wouldn't we also want to prgress America's national chart from 1776 up to 2004 too?

Whichever July 4, 1776 chart that we use, it is interesting to note that the US progressed Sun entered Pisces within a day or so of election day 2004. These things take a good deal of time to unfold, so I doubt it could be argued that this Pisces Ingress had an effect on this most recent election, but it might be fun to look at over time.

Another chart to consider is the Grand Conjunction that preceeded US independence, March 18, 1762, 4:41 GMT, Washington DC. Note the GMT and also note DC did not exist in 1762, but the coordinates did and moving the chart to the de facto capital of the US, New York, doesn't change it much.

Astrologer Ken Negus did some work with Presidents that have natal Saturn - Jupiter squares. There are six if you count Bill Clinton's out of sign square. G.W. Bush has one and so does John Quincy Adams the only other son of a President to be elected President. I did a little work with those charts, and found some interesting connections with the conjunction chart that I might post elsewhere on this list if there is any interest.

I will mention one; Grover Cleveland, the only man to be elected to non-consecutive terms as President was born on March 18 (In the great state of New Jersey) and the angles in his natal chart are almost identical to the angles in the conjunction chart.

This is an interesting chart, but the discussion properly belongs in the mundane section.

Lilly used horary for battle predictions, and I believe other political predictions, but he never predicted the outcome of a Presidential election.

Tom

It must be asked: Why do we need to predict at all? Not only in world matters, but in our own lives. Prediction seems to play on two main factors: fear and a need to feel in control. And then there is the ego gratification of being able to say that you saw ?it? coming.

I think that's where we all all start off - fear and the need to feel in control. But with some prompting by the good folks at SkyScript, in a few cases I have used it differently, and this in part explains why I don't think about using astrology to predict elections. I've found that you can use horary in particular as a practical way to decide if you are wasting your time, or to get some sense of peace about something. A few examples. I did one horary about a year ago about a stone and masonry job that I really wanted and needed. The chart showed that the time for that had past, so I put the job out of mind and went about looking for better work. Another time I had made a huge mistake with a friend of mine and we weren't speaking. The chart showed that that we would patch things up, but it would take some time. I also saw that it would be best not to talk to him about it, but to just let time do it's heaing for me. So instead of fretting about what to do, and trying to apologize over and over again, I took some time for myself, read some books, and spent a lot of nights in front of the fireplace. The chart gave me the confidence not to worry myself silly. Another chart showed that someone who I had met and liked probably had someone else in his life and either way, nothing was going to develop between us. Sure, I called him back a few times and tried to meet up, but I wasn't that disappointed when it didn't happen and I didn't spend any time thnking about it.

A chart can be like a good therapist - they can tell what's most likely to happen, but it's up to you how you use it. And I damn well know that in the most difficult situations, it's next to impossible to take this 'higher road' with a chart. But after going through some of those a few times, it does seem just bit easier to accept what a chart has to say.

And I don't think there's anything so horrible about that feeling of pride that you got it right. What's so wrong with that?

This is all a bit off topic from the election, but it came up so there's no harm in talking about it.

I did a little work with those charts, and found some interesting connections with the conjunction chart that I might post elsewhere on this list if there is any interest.

Hi Tom,

I'd be interested in what you found if you have the time to post the info.

Cheers
Sue