Libsolars in U.S. Election Years

[Jim Eshelman]

Gov. Bill Clinton (Democrat of Arkansas) beat President George H.W. Bush and independent candidate Ross Perot. Clinton for 43% of the vote to Bush's 37%. (It is thought that Perot's 19% were won at Bush's expense.) This gave Clinton 32 states plus DC for 370 of the 538 electoral votes.

Bush had the disadvantage of a failing economy and breaking his pledge not to raise taxes (a pledge he made under duress: he knew better at the time).

The Libsolar is dormant and has no Moon aspects.

[Jim Eshelman]

President Bill Clinton (Democrat) beat Sen. Bob Dole (Republican of KS) and Reform candidate Ross Perot. Clinton received 49% of the popular vote to Dole's 41%; it is thought that Perot's 9% came primarily at Dole's expense. Clinton won 31 of 50 states plus DC, giving him 379 electoral votes out of a possible 538.

The Libsolar is dormant and has no Moon aspects.

[Jim Eshelman]

Gov. George W. Bush (Republican of Texas) beat Vice President Al Gore (Democrat). Bush received minority of the popular vote, 47.9% to Gore's 48.4%. However, following a contested vote count in Florida that was resolved by a Supreme Court decision, Bush won 30 states and 271 electoral votes, 1 more than was needed to become president.

Jupiter on IC 0°21'
Pluto on MC 2°29'
-- Jupiter-Pluto op. 0°22'
Venus sq. Asc 1°25' [op. non-angular Saturn 1°38']
Moon-Mars sq. 2°42'

The message couldn't be clearer: The first election in memory to be called a "constitutional crisis" is marked by a Jupiter-Pluto opposition along the meridian - throwing the matter to an unprecedented judicial resolution - with a contentious Moon-Mars conflict. The losers became winners and the winners losers in the Jupiter-Pluto flip that dominated most of the Libsolar quarter.

Third party Ralph Nader was consider an "upset" factor, stealing critical votes from Gore - a further fulfillment of the symbolism.

[Jim Eshelman]

President George W. Bush (Republican) narrowly beat Sen. John Kerry (Democrat of MA). Bush had 51% of the popular vote to Kerry's 48%. This gave him 31 states and 286 of the 538 possible electoral votes.

Venus sq. MC 0°23'
Uranus on Asc 1°06'
Moon & Pluto more widely foreground
-- Venus-Pluto sq. 0°55'
Moon-Venus sq. 2°35'

The charts suggests a kindly, non-hostile election with a focus on social issues. It was, in fact, one in which gay marriage was a big issue with a large number of states voting to effectively outlaw it. (This changed nationwide a few years later.)

A range of issues were discussed thoroughly in the campaign: post-9/11 security, ongoing wars, foreign policy in general, social issues such as gay marriage and the perennial abortion issue, health care reform, and more. Kerry showed weakness and the Bush machine capitalized on it.

Again, we find that planets like Uranus in these Libsolars don't particularly mean change of president, though they probably due show the nation being inspired in Uranian ways (such as the social issue theme of this election). I suppose the doubled Venus importance, besides having a milder campaign than usual, drew out issues of "manliness" indirectly - Bush pushing himself as decisive and Kerry as flip-flopping, Kerry pushing his military record which then came under attack.

[Jim Eshelman]

Sen. Barack Obama (Democrat of IL) beat Sen. John McCain (Republican of AZ). Obama won 53% of the popular vote to McCain's 46%. Obama won 28 states plus DC (and one EC vote in Nebraska), giving him 365 electoral votes of a possible 538.

Pluto on MC 1°46'
Uranus on Asc 2°32'
Saturn on Dsc 2°44'
Mercury more widely foreground
-- Saturn-Uranus op. 0°12' in mundo

I remember, at the time, the election had a level of partisan polarization that I hadn't seen before. This Saturn-Uranus opposition persisted one way or the other through most of Obama's first term and seemed to accentuate the partisan extremism (though the process had already begun around Bush). The election was also a Pluto-like "first," with a Black president's election, and was destined to be radical and historic no matter what, i.e., either a Black man or a woman was certain to be nominated for president. An economic collapse mid-campaign, soon after the nominating conventions, tested everyone.

That said, were I presented with this chart ahead of the election I'm not sure what I'd make of it. We knew that the incumbent was not running. I'm pretty sure I'd have said that, against resistance and opposition, the outcome would substantially reverse the course of things - as it did. However, the common interpretation of Uranus + Pluto as throwing to the underdog is unfitting, since Obama was never the underdog.

[Jim Eshelman]

President Barack Obama (Democrat) beat former Gov. Mitt Romney (Republican of MA) in a close race. Obama got 51% of the popular vote to Romney's 47%, winning 26 states and DC - just one more than half the states - and 332 of 538 electoral votes.

Uranus on Asc 0°34'
Pluto sq. Asc 1°16'
Sun and Venus widely foreground
-- Uranus-Pluto sq. 1°22'
-- Venus sq. non-foreground Jupiter 1°08'
Moon-Neptune sq. 2°13'

Again, Uranus and Pluto dominate, this time also in close square. This puzzles me since there was nothing radical, unexpected, or overturning about this election.

Recovery from the Great Recession plus the recently enacted Obamacare medical program were, of course, leading issues, with lesser attention to ongoing American wars.

[Jim Eshelman]

Businessman Donald Trump (Republican) beat Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Democrat). Trump received a minority of the popular vote, 46 to Clinton 48%. However, he won 30 states such that he won 304 electoral votes of 538 possible votes.

Sun on Dsc 0°18'
Mars on MC 0°24'
Uranus on Asc 1°00'
Pluto on MC 1°04'
Mercury on Dsc 2°17'
Jupiter widely foreground
-- Sun-Mars sq. 0°06' in mundo
-- Mars-Uranus sq. 0°36' in mundo
-- Sun-Uranus sq. 0°42' in mundo
-- Mars-Pluto conj. 1°04'
-- Sun-Uranus op. 1°17' in mundo
-- Sun-Pluto sq. 1°22' in mundo
-- Mercury-Mars sq. 1°53' in mundo
-- Sun-Mercury conj. 1°59' in mundo
-- Uranus-Pluto 2°03' in mundo
Moon-Venus op. 1°38'

This astonishing Libsolar has become legendary and, to a great extent, is responsible for sponsoring this present study. It shows the complete reversal of expectation, a radical overthrow, an attack on the nation (credibly of a cyber nature, matching what we now know occurred).

It's exemplary. I fond only one weakness in it: Though the prior (2012) Libsolar did not show attack elements (there were none known to me), it does show at least as strong a Uranus-Pluto aspect presence. Yet none of the telltale marks were in that election. This leaves uncertainty about how to handle the charts.

[Jim Eshelman]

Studying these charts has been of considerable interest and even value to me.

On the positive, I have no doubt that these Libsolars are showing (most of the time, and probably depending on other charts at the same time) the psychological tone of the nation during their quarters.

On the negative, they are not simple "election prediction charts." They are of value to those only in the context of then-existing conditions. For example, there are no patterns favoring one party or the other, or even favoring incumbents vs. challengers. Rather, one can, most of the time, look at the Libsolar and see the issues that are likely to catch fire and shape the final leg of a campaign.

They don't always do this, though. I imagine they don't do it the 7 times out of 8 that has proven a useful guide for "reliability thresholds." I think there are other patterns we need to find. I suspect these will be in he Capsolars (or, more broadly, in the Annual charts, whether Capsolar or Cansolar).

When I have time, the next study will be to repeat this with the Year charts.

(I'll now unlock this thread to comments.)

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

That said, were I presented with this chart ahead of the election I'm not sure what I'd make of it. We knew that the incumbent was not running. I'm pretty sure I'd have said that, against resistance and opposition, the outcome would substantially reverse the course of things - as it did. However, the common interpretation of Uranus + Pluto as throwing to the underdog is unfitting, since Obama was never the underdog.

Huh?
Black men are always the underdog. And the white men in Congress, especially Mitch McConnell, made sure the status quo was preserved. Most people in the Midwest and Plains states were completely shocked by Obama's win. It was only on the coasts that people thought he had any chance.

[Jim Eshelman]

I agree with you for 2008. By 2012, for his second term, it was no longer a new thing and certainly not a reversal, nor were the posted odds weighted against him. He was just an incumbent who won reelection.