May 25, 2004
Presidents and Pluto . . . and the Rest
HAVING LAID OUT the problem in the first part of this article, I will begin this part by saying categorically that Pluto seems to play only a supportive role in who wins or loses a Presidential election, and most of my other ancient rules about transits to the natal and progressed fare about the same. On the other hand, certain transits do seem to be important during an election, though for the most part they are quite different than what I would have expected.
Years ago, my study of this question had been done in a somewhat informal way, so with the help of more modern tools than pencil and paper and with the benefit of a few more election cycles to consider, I decided to take a closer look at the issue. In my effort to look more closely at the question of transits to the “two Suns,” I collected the data on all major candidates plus the transits on election day from 1932 through 2000, calculating each man’s natal and progressed Sun, and then tabulating the actual transits to these two points on the election day in question. 1932 seemed a logical starting point because it was a watershed election in terms of the use of film and radio, and generally marked a new era in national politics.
However, I omitted 1940 and 1944 from my analysis, as Franklin Roosevelt is the only President ever elected to more than two terms, so including electoral contests past the first two for him would have given him more weight than any of the other candidates. I took a different tack with Richard Nixon, who was the only one other than Roosevelt to run in more than two contests (he lost the first and won the next two). However, as he was both a winner and a loser, and eight years separated his first run at the office from the next two, his case seemed quite different from Roosevelt’s, so all elections he ran in were included.
Finally, I did not include third-party candidates, as even though Ross Perot set records in this regard, there are just too many to consider, none has ever won, and historically their main role is to affect the strategies and tactics of the major party candidates. If a third-party candidate ever did win, the likelihood is that the astrological situation would not differ much, if at all, from that of a winning major party candidate.
The basic approach was to consider the number and type of “standard” aspects (semisextile, sextile, square, trine, quincunx, and opposition) on election day to the natal and progressed Suns of both winners and losers, allowing a three-degree orb. Below is a section of the raw data, as the complete table is too large to show here. At the top of the five-line entry for each election can be seen the planets for EST noon on election day, while on the left can be found the candidate’s birth date, as well his natal Sun and his progressed Sun for the election.
The entries to the right of the candidate’s solar positions show the distance of those two points from the nearest 30-degree aspect on the election day in question to each planet. In this table, close 30-degree aspects of any kind have a value tending toward zero degrees, while a lack of such aspect is shown by a value closer to 15 degrees. For example, Roosevelt’s natal sun at 288.04° is 2.77° degrees away from an exact 30-degree aspect with the transiting sun (195.27°). The longitudes in this table are sidereal, because I may at some point make comparisons with the Galactic Center or other fixed points on the celestial sphere.
More interesting than the raw data is the tabulation of the planets in close aspect to the “two Suns” on election day for both winners and losers.
A listing of all of the aspects for elections from 1932 to 2000 can be found below in Table 1. After tabulating all of these aspects, I could see why I had come up with my original rules, but it was also clear why those rules came up short. Pluto, which I had singled out as a “winner” planet all by itself, is instead part of a general pattern involving certain types of aspects to the birth Sun from planets Saturn through Pluto. Jupiter, a planet I had originally linked with losing candidates, actually contributes the fewest transits to the Sun for winners and losers alike. However, it does seem to be involved in an interesting pattern along with Venus and Mars which seems at least as crucial as the Saturn through Pluto aspects, even though traditional aspects may or may not be involved.
One more observation, noted in the rules that follow, is that I could find no clear pattern for transits to the progressed Sun, so I am not including that table here, though I will make it available. Even though the same number of events was involved, the overall number of aspects to the candidates’ progressed Suns was noticeably lower than the number of aspects to the natal Suns. This suggests that those to the progressed Sun are more or less random. It could also suggest that I’ve done my arithmetic wrong, but so far double checking hasn’t shown any problems of this sort. These aspect totals are
Winners’ birth Suns: 54
Losers’ birth Suns: 57
Winners’ progressed Suns: 43
Losers’ progressed Suns: 46
Important note: These rules are best applied to American Presidential elections only. A local race for a council seat is not likely to have the same dynamics as a national election for an office that is fairly unique among democracies, most of which use a parliamentary system. Other types of elections may respond to similar configurations, but there are no guarantees.
1. Certain transits to the natal Suns of the two major party candidates are useful indicators of the outcome of a Presidential election, though they are less effective in cases where one or more strong third-party candidates are involved. Transits to the progressed Sun seem to have little effectiveness, if any.
2. Transits of Pluto to natal Sun can be helpful at getting a candidate in the game, but the degree to which these help or hinder depends on the aspects involved, as in rule 3.
3. Electoral losers tend to have trines (either waxing or waning) to the outer planets, Saturn through Pluto. Winners tend to have quincunxes or squares to the same set of planets. Conjunctions to these planets tend to be neutral.
4. Winners show an overall lack of transiting opposition aspects to the Sun.
5. Conjunctions, oppositions, and the waxing square or waxing semisextile to Venus, Mars, and Jupiter to the natal Sun are useful indicators of electoral failure. The same aspects when waning may be useful indicators of electoral success.
6. Even when not aspected, Venus, Mars, and Jupiter rising before the Sun (i.e., in the 160 or so degrees to the West of the Sun) tend to be associated with electoral success, while if they rise after the Sun (i.e., in the 160 or so degrees to the East) they tend to be associated with electoral failure.
7. These rules deal only with transits the natal Sun, and should be considered along with other transits, the general suitability of the two candidates’ charts for a public contest like this, and other more general indicators of the emotional and political mood and tone around the time of election.