Deb wrote:

Mark, it wasn't until the day before the election that I started to look at the charts, and just want to say thank you for the work you put into this thread, which made a great resource.

Thanks. Yes I didn't have as much time for this particular election as I would have liked either. Hence the thread started rather late this year.

Deb wrote:

(One suggestion if you do this again in future, is that a list of links or copies of charts kept at the top of the thread would be really great - perhaps your opening post could be updated with the link whenever an important chart is added?).

I think its sometimes difficult to know all the charts you are going to display at the outset of a thread. But I guess one could keep editing it as you suggest.

Deb wrote:

The exciting thing for the country now is that so many top politicians have fallen at this election that we are going to see some really radical changes in the opposition parties. This could be a very important turning point for the Labour party, because a whole new team is going to be put together now, and from what I've seen of the likely candidates for leadership there's a lot of talent to be exploited.

Yes. I actually heard some pundits discussing just that yesterday. The party seemed to have been divided for decades between the Blairites and Brownites but now both politicians are long gone the new party figures can hopefully adopt a totally independent stance. Labour certainly needs a fresh vision of what it actually stands for in the early 21st century. I plan to open a thread on the next leadership election. Fortunately, I notice one of the front runners (Yvette Cooper) was born in Inverness so I should be able to get an AA time for her.

Deb wrote:

This time I hope we can get better data than we did for Milliband, whose chart in astro-database is surely wrong, since it adds an hour for daylight saving in December, whereas according to the time and date website, this was ended on 27 October 1968, and was not employed again until 1972. http://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/ ... ?year=1969

I just checked out Wikipedia on so called British Standard Time in that period but it doesn't coincide with what you have said at all.

A further inquiry during 1966?67 led the government of Harold Wilson to introduce the British Standard Time experiment, with Britain remaining on GMT+1 throughout the year. This took place between 27 October 1968 and 31 October 1971, when there was a reversion to the previous arrangement. ..........The trial was the subject of a House of Commons debate on 2 December 1970 when, on a free vote, the House of Commons voted by 366 to 81 votes to end the experiment.

Mark

A further inquiry during 1966?67 led the government of Harold Wilson to introduce the British Standard Time experiment, with Britain remaining on GMT+1 throughout the year.

I expected something like that would explain this, and was looking for confirmation of it on the Time and Date site, but they report it differently on the link I gave. According to them, BST ended n Oct '67 and resumed again on 19 March 1972. The top of their page for 1969 states:

DST Not Observed in year 1969
London did not observe Daylight Saving Time this year.

A similar statement is made for 1970:
http://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/ ... ?year=1970

Not so very long ago, we all had our own reference books to check these sorts of details whilst calculating charts. Now we seem reduced to relying on what websites report. I'd imagine that the Wikipedia report is more reliable here.

From the Royal Museum Greenwich site:

http://www.rmg.co.uk/explore/astronomy- ... ummer-time

After the war, summer time was invoked each year from 1948 to 1967. In 1968 clocks were advanced one hour ahead of GMT on 18 February and remained so until British Standard Time, during which clocks were kept in advance of GMT all year, came into force between 27 October 1968 and 31 October 1971.

http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/info/bst2.htm

So, it was BST all year round in 1969.

Deb wrote:This time I hope we can get better data than we did for Milliband, whose chart in astro-database is surely wrong, since it adds an hour for daylight saving in December, whereas according to the time and date website, this was ended on 27 October 1968, and was not employed again until 1972.
http://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/ ... ?year=1969

Sorry to say Deb, but I think you read the data at timeanddate.com wrongly. On 18 Feb 1968 at 02:00 time changed so 1 hour was added (DST start) to GMT and this extra hour then stayed until 31 Oct 1971 at 03:00 when clocks were set back 1 hour to GMT.

So astro-database is correct in that case, however the time given may still be wrong but I have not studied red's appearance or seen him in action enough to be absolutely sure he doesn't have Taurus rising. We have to remember that arranged pictures often are "beautified" and they get a make-up before appearing on television.

Deb wrote:

Not so very long ago, we all had our own reference books to check these sorts of details whilst calculating charts. Now we seem reduced to relying on what websites report. I'd imagine that the Wikipedia report is more reliable here.

Even though this particular data question seems settled you raise an important point. Nowadays astrologers rely on software to calculate our charts. We accept things like daylight saving are naturally correct. Still programmers can make the odd mistake too. We should be vigilant on such issues. I had almost largely forgotten about the daylight changes made during this period. But you have reminded me about those extremely dark winter mornings in Scotland as a schoolchild!

Mark

Hi JoakimS - yes I completely accept that point now, which is why I said the Wikipedia report seems correct. I found the TimeandDate site info very confusing, but I am relieved to be reassured that their details are not inaccurate, just badly reported.

Joakim
The question of Ed Miliband and his appearance did come up here around the 9th April on this thread but I appreciate that you would rather decide for yourself
Matthew

Fleur wrote:
Thanks. I suppose if that T-square of Jupiter opposition Saturn square Neptune's antiscion also had Neptune's antiscion conjunct the Midheaven, you would have had a more effective, powerful and charismatic leader?

I confess that I am rusty on outer planets and am not yet confident on antiscions. I am a bit generous in assigning angularity to planets though and that is one reason why I did not question the chart as first offered for we have Mercury in the 10th and Saturn, whilst more than five degrees from the ASC it still looks close enough as does the Moon to the 4th cusp.

I do not follow his politics but he is a man who took charge of a major political party and to come second in election is way ahead of 60 million others who just voted. it would not have happened to someone with succedent planets.
Saturn may make him look geeky but judge not by the outer raiment or whatever the good book tells us

Matthew

there is nothing charismatic about saturn rising, lol.. i haven't seen milibrand - picture or on tv or any format, that i am aware of - but if saturn is in the vicinity of his ascendant it is very unlikely he has much of any charisma! saturn has more of a dour look to it.. saturn in taurus rising sounds like someone who might look like they have constipation, lol.. surely not charisma, lol..

I do not recall using the word charisma. Kindly point to the part of his chart that says that he is not or at least was not the leader of the second largest political party in the UK
Thanks

And remember Ted Bovis in Hi di hi. The first rule of comedy is that you must have reality

Sorry James but the subject is a sore one in this context. I tried to open a thread on Miliband and his chart and had little response apart from a moderator saying that natal astrology could not be discussed in the traditional forum unless it was in a boring technical manner. Zzzzzxz

In any case the Gemini rising chart was withdrawn because it was wrong so we are stuck with Taurus but the criteria for any kind of public image is a tenth house matter rather than a sign issue I would humbly suggest
Matthew