Mark, as I stated on that thread, my use of the 8:02 birth time there was just to get it started. Maybe I should have stressed in the OP that other birth time discussions are, of course, welcome. I hope that is clear now.

As moderator, maybe you'd like to combine the two threads in a way that gives you the OP, but adds my posts to your thread further down.

I take your point on nativities.

If the question is, "Who will win the election?" or "Who will be the next president of the United States?" I would think natal charts are critical. I mean, if someone is the next POTUS, you'd have to expect some activity surrounding his/her MC or 10th house.

Sometimes a natal chart for a political leader can be used in a mundane sort of way. We just apply the mundane readings of planets and houses to the person's natal chart.

Othertimes not, but then we might display something like the person's natal placements in a bi-wheel against the chart for the Constitution or founding date of the nation.

To me the bigger issue is whether an astrological "hit" means a win or a loss. It might just mean how the person feels that day.

Maybe the losing candidate is secretly relieved, or the winner privately fears s/he cannot manage the job.

Waybread wrote:

To me the bigger issue is whether an astrological "hit" means a win or a loss. It might just mean how the person feels that day.

Maybe the losing candidate is secretly relieved, or the winner privately fears s/he cannot manage the job.

This is definitely a modern tropical perspective. Both western classical astrology and India's astrology would be pointing to the actual outcome of an election: Jupiter = winning; Saturn = losing. This is what Joni Patry emphasized in her video: In January Saturn is on Donald Trump's Moon-Ketu opposing his Sun. Currently Hillary (8:02 PM) is running Moon-Jupiter dasa, and transit Jupiter is opposing her Moon.

One person I might expect to be somewhat unhappy about winning is vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine. In his talk at the Democratic convention he emphasized his stability, living in the same house for many years, etc. I suspect he might see the duties of Vice President as a burden not conducive to his lifestyle. But nevertheless, his chart would show a win if Hillary does win the election.

With the 8:01:30 PM time I use:

6 Gem 53 Ascendant Hillary (Krishnamurti)
8 Gem 27 Fortuna Kaine

6 Psc 11 Moon Hillary
11 Psc 45 Ascendant Kaine

09 Aqu 50 Mercury Kaine
12 Aqu 30 MC Hillary
14 Aqu 18 Sun Kaine

10 Cap 29 Fortuna Hillary
08 Cap 49 Venus Kaine

These contacts look VERY convincing to me!

The 6:30 PM (18:30) USA Chart

Here is another Sagittarius rising chart for the USA which Joni Patry uses (mentioned in her video), and which is well known among Jyotish astrologers. The time is actually quite close to the Sibly chart of 5:10 PM and the Regulus (2008) chart of 18:17:37.

The 6:30 PM chart, now called the Kelleher chart, has a very interesting history. The 6:30 hour was first mentioned way back in 1978 in the October 1978 edition of The Mercury Hour (page 12). This was a hard copy magazine, edited by Edith Custer, written totally by subscribers. This time was sent to the magazine by Phyllis Givens who psychically channeled a personality called ?Hemetros.? (Given as the time signatures were completed on the document in the evening.)

Fast forward to 1985 when this same time was determined by Jyotish astrologer James Kelleher. I don?t know if Kelleher ever mentioned or admitted that he was aware of the Hemetros 18:30 PM time, but he ended up with exactly the same time in his research.

Later on in 1998 this same hour was given by Yogi Karve, the Indian astrologer who has the spiritual or psychic gift of determining precise times of birth. Here is an article which describes Kelleher?s research and how (he said) he came to the 18:30 USA time for July 4, 1776.
http://www.jameskelleher.com/world/worl ... world1.htm

It?s possible that the differences in time between the Sibly, Regulus and Kelleher charts can be related to tropical and sidereal transits to the natal USA chart, whose orbs get wider and wider apart with the passage of time.

Hello Therese,

That information might have fitted better on a thread devoted to the US chart itself but it is very interesting nonetheless. I will add it to my thread on charts times for July 4th 1776.

There have been so many varied approaches to the US chart by astrologers going back to Sibly , and 19th century figures like Luke Broughton I think it would be a very interesting topic for an article or even a book in itself. I may get round to that one day.

Mark

Mark wrote:

That information might have fitted better on a thread devoted to the US chart itself but it is very interesting nonetheless. I will add it to my thread on charts times for July 4th 1776.

There have been so many varied approaches to the US chart by astrologers going back to Sibly , and 19th century figures like Luke Broughton I think it would be a very interesting topic for an article or even a book in itself. I may get round to that one day.

It didn't occur to me that there might be a thread on the USA chart, except for the locked thread (very helpful to have that list!) on the various USA charts. It seems logical to me that several dates would provide valid charts, depending on the varied purposes they might be used for. But to investigate and research so many possibilities: Not for the faint of heart, and that includes myself!

Following last night's Clinton-Trump debate, here is a quote from the on-line New York Times today:

"While it will take a few days for post-debate polling to come in, Mrs. Clinton's chances in prediction-market based models jumped several points immediately after the debate. A CNN/ORC instant poll of debate viewers gave Mrs. Clinton the victory by a margin of 62 to 27 percent."

Donald Trump didn't make himself look good last night. After the debate one commentator on CNN said he counted 52 times when Trump interrupted Hillary Clinton. But the general CNN panel opinion was that she handled the interruptions professionally with poise and calmness.Trump was his usual bombastic self during most of the debate.

The opinion on the CNN panel after the debate was that Trump did well for the first half hour or so, but then fell apart and became defensive. There was no argument that Hillary was better prepared on the topics being discussed. This is no surprise due to her many years in government work whereas Trump has been a multi-million or billion dollar businessman specializing in real estate.

It may not count for much, but the 9 PM debate chart had transiting Mars in a one degree opposition to Hillary's 8:01:30 PM ascendant, and she wore a bright red pants suit. Also, as expected, Trump didn't refrain from attacks on her policies.

Interesting, Therese. Of course, there's the cusp of the 7th house indicating one's open enemies.

I was just checking Mark's summary topic of astrologers who have made predictions about the USA election. It's interesting to compare the groups that Mark has set out by category. There's a big difference between those of us who live here in the States with a bird's eye day-to-day view of the candidates, and those who live in other countries:

USA Residents (20 total):
70% Clinton win
30 % Trump win

Other Countries (23 total):
52.3% Clinton win
47.7% Trump win

Mark's summary topic really sets out the many different techniques astrologers use. I suppose that could be a plus or minus depending on how we view astrology. Depending on where you live in the US, media is slanted toward one candidate or the other. So we get the New York Times giving Clinton more than a 70% chance of winning, but the media in other areas is keeping Trump and Clinton in a close contest.

Hi Therese,

Actually there is an error in my percentage figures. I actually under calculated the % of astrologers based in the USA predicting a Clinton win. Its actually even higher at 85%.

I suppose there are two ways of explaining this wide disparity. Firstly, does this show inherent pro-Democrat bias in the US astrological community? Could it be that astrologers are not an accurate reflection of the American population as a whole and tend to be more liberal/left leaning than the average American? If so, does the balance of pro-Democrat predictions by US astrologers reflect such a political prejudice?

A second, explanation might be that American astrologers possess a greater understanding of US political structures such as the electoral college which currently gives the Democrats a built in advantage. So might these insights combined with astrological technique give American astrologers an inherent edge in making an accurate prediction?

Astrologers Based in USA

Number of predictions: 20
Clinton win: 17 astrologers
Trump win: 3 astrologers
Balance of Predictions by %: Clinton win 85%. Trump win 15%

Astrologers Outside USA

Number of Predictions: 23
Clinton win: 12 astrologers
Trump win: 11 astrologers
Balance of Predictions by %: Clinton win 52.2%. Trump win 47.8%

Mark wrote:

I suppose there are two ways of explaining this wide disparity. Firstly, does this show inherent pro-Democrat bias in the US astrological community? Could it be that astrologers are not an accurate reflection of the American population as a whole and tend to be more liberal/left leaning than the average American? If so, does the balance of pro-Democrat predictions by US astrologers reflect such a political prejudice?

I think it's probably true that astrologers in the United States lean more toward the Democratic persuasion. So I wouldn't take the high percentage of Clinton predictions as representing the American pubic as a whole. I don't have records to check, but for past elections I believe that the Democratic-Republication split for astrological predictions was more equal. This year there are many astrological pointers to difficulties for Donald Trump.

A second, explanation might be that American astrologers possess a greater understanding of US political structures such as the electoral college which currently gives the Democrats a built in advantage. So might these insights combined with astrological technique give American astrologers an inherent edge in making an accurate prediction?

Anyone with even a little political know-how realizes that Donald Trump doesn't have the disposition to cooperate with Congress, or for that matter, to cooperate with anyone else. He has been a self-made man supporting his own interests as a businessman. Hillary has spent most of her adult life in politics and knows the cooperative political ropes through and through. Even Republicans are supporting Hillary as they know that Donald Trump doesn't have the personality or experience to be a successful president. The split in the Republican party is very real and traumatic for Republicans.

The situation really boils down to those who understand how government works support Hillary Clinton, and Trump supporters are those who know little about government, but like the idea of an entertaining outsider with charisma leading the country. Education or the lack of it plays a big part in the choices people are making at this time. There is also the usual split of Democratic support along the heavily populated coasts and Republican support in the central sparsely settled rural part of the country.

Interesting data, Mark.

I suppose the difference in predictions is explained by the fact that most Americans cannot believe that their fellow citizens would actually vote for Trump; whereas Europeans get that Americans actually could and would.

Here is an interesting site for tracking the percentage of each candidate's chances of winning. There's a clever graph with a slider that goes all the way back to June that shows percentage changes. There are also small graphs that show the changes in key states of who is likely to carry each state. The current percentages for Clinton are 82%. Trump 18%.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016 ... 85915&_r=0