Predicting Future Presidential Elections from Past Ones

There are two possible ways to predict the outcome of a political election: either using mundane charts (such as Ingresses, election day charts, prior lunations), or by comparative natal methods. Lee published some mundane studies in a previous article,[2] and in another article she reported some possible methods comparing natal charts: the actual, instead of the theoretical results for successful candidates.[3] One of the simplest ways to study political elections from a natal perspective is to study presidents’ nativities at the time of their successful elections, compared to the nativity of the unsuccessful candidate. We have restricted this study to presidents and candidates whose data meets the Rodden AA-B criteria.[4] These strictures result in a total of sixteen elections which we can study. These are shown in Table 1.

Year	Candidates. The candidate with an asterisk (*) won.	Date Inaugurated
1864	George B. McClellan (AA) vs Abraham Lincoln* (B)	3/4/1861
1896	William Jennings Bryan (B) vs William McKinley* (A)	3/4/1897
1900	William Jennings Bryan (B) vs William McKinley* (A)	3/4/1901
1908	William Jennings Bryan (B) vs William H Taft* (A)	3/4/1909
1912	Theodore Roosevelt (B) vs Woodrow Wilson* (B)	3/4/1913
1916	Charles Evans Hughes (A) Woodrow Wilson* (B)	3/4/1917
1936	Alf Landon (A) vs Franklin Roosevelt* (AA)	1/20/1937
1940	Wendell Wilkie (A) vs Franklin Roosevelt* (AA)	1/20/1941
1960	Richard Nixon (AA) vs John F. Kennedy* (A)	1/20/1961
1972	George McGovern (A) vs Richard M. Nixon* (AA)	1/20/1973
1976	Gerald Ford (AA) vs James E. Carter* (AA)	1/20/1977
1980	James E. Carter (AA) vs Ronald Reagan*(B)	1/20/1981
1984	Ronald Reagan*(B) vs Walter F. Mondale (AA)	1/20/1985
1988	Michael Dukakis (AA) vs George Bush* (A)	1/20/1989
1992	George Bush (A) vs William Clinton* (A)	1/20/1993
1996	Robert Dole (A) vs William Clinton* (A)	1/20/1997

In class, Lee put forward the following challenge: pick your favorite astrological technique, and see if you can get quantitative results that predict the outcome. This article gives some of these results.

Penny picked profections. Profections are a classical technique in which the Ascendant is moved one house for each year of life. Accordingly: the 1^st House gives the first year of life, the 2^nd House the 2^nd (age one), etc. A chart may be drawn with the profected Ascendant as the 1^st House cusp, and the twelve houses interpreted accordingly. Because of the importance of angularity, Penny looked at the Profected 1st and its respective Natal House, the Profected 10th and its respective Natal House, and the Profected Election (based upon November date) from the Profected 1st. House. Then we will look for any combinations which repeat with emphasis on the natal 10th. These results are shown in Table 2.

Table Two. Profections of Presidential Elections - Winners and Losers. Asterisk (*) denotes the predicted winner.

Of the sixteen elections, two were too close to call, and the others worked according to this model. As far as 2000 is concerned, Gore's chart has greater dignity. Neither Bush nor Gore has connections between houses. We have seen the P1 house in dignity as the winner in the past. Al Gore does have an 8th house connection this may indicate a death in office. Bush does not have any contacts for winning. This is only slight favor for Gore.

The examples do not give enough results to determine whether the Nodes or Fortuna should count in the weighting, in each case the winner had more angular planets where the system worked. In every case where the system did not work, Mars was angular for the losing candidate.

If we consider that this is a Jupiter/Saturn conjunction year which is the "Presidential Death Cycle" Fran is concerned for Gore because his SA Moon is only 2 degrees from the 8th house and his SA Uranus is less than a degree from the natal Saturn/Pluto midpoint in the 1st house. (Sat/Plu is a death axis in Cosmobiology.)

Fran noted the Aries Point, or any SA planet directed to zero degrees of a cardinal sign because this point is associated with being in the public eye or achieving prominence according to Cosmobiology.

Ralph’s model was so simple, it didn’t require a table to explain. He looked at the progressed 10th, its ruler and the dignity/debility of the ruler, and the number of planets on the progressed angles.

Looking at outer planets in the 10th, with Saturn there the nominee had 1 win and 4 losses; Neptune there had 2 wins and 1 loss; Uranus 0 wins and 2 losses; Pluto 2 wins and 2 losses; Jupiter did not appear there. Overall, 5 wins and 9 losses.

Second, the nominee with the higher score for dignity/debility of the progressed 10th ruler had 6 wins and 4 losses(60%); there were 5 draws.

Third, the nominee with the most number of planets, including the luminaries, had 7 wins and 5 losses(58%); there were 2 draws.

However, then he noticed the Vertex was an extraordinary indicator. The closer the Vertex to the Midheaven, the greater the chance of winning. The closer to the Descendant (the Portals of Death?), the greater the chance of losing.

Asking one question, " Whose progressed Vertex is closest to the Midheaven?" results in 14 wins and 0 losses!

While both Bush and Gore are a poor sample in that neither has his Vertex anywhere near the mc, with both in the 7th, a bad place to be, Gore's is 6 degrees closer to the Midheaven. Hence, Gore wins.

Here we see three completely different methods, all producing interesting looking results from a historical standpoint, and all predicting the same outcome this year: Gore by a small margin. Do the methods work predictively? We shall see!

[1] Also known as Lee’s Atlanta Classical Studies Group. Ralph has completed Classical Studies in Electional, Mundane and Gaming; Frances has completed Classical Studies in Horary; Penny has completed Classical Studies in Horary, Natal, Electional, Mundane and Gaming.

[2] J. Lee Lehman. 1998. Presidential Elections as Warfare. Horary Practitioner 9: 47-51.

[3] J. Lee Lehman. 2000. US Presidential Elections: The Use of Past Elections to Predict Future Outcomes. Astrological Journal 42(5): 6-15.

[4] Thanks to Lois Rodden and Mark McDonough for the work which has culminated in the AstroDataBank ^®. All the data here is from the ADB, except for Ronald Reagan’s data, which was reported on their web site (http://www.astrodatabank.com/) as finally achieving B status. Full descriptions of the Rodden Ratings are also available on the site.

Table Two. Profections of Presidential Elections - Winners and Losers. Asterisk (*) denotes the predicted winner.

Election of 1864

Election of 1896

Election of 1900

Election of 1908

Election of 1912

Election of 1916

Election of 1936

* Franklin Roosevelt – Winner

Election of 1940

Election of 1960

Election of 1972

Election of 1976

Election of 1980

* Ronald Reagan - Winner

Election of 1984

Election of 1988

Election of 1992

Election of 1996

Election of 2000


	© 2006, All Rights Reserved - Web Site Design by will-harris.com