Showing posts with label Hillary Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hillary Clinton. Show all posts

Monday, November 07, 2016

Why the US Election isn't so important

I'm not sure that the outcome of the US election matters too much. There are 2 candidates: Hillary Clinton, who is temperamentally unsuited to the post, being a private person who just needs a job to get on with; and Donald Trump, who is morally unsuited. As his biographer said recently, he's the sort of guy who could push the nuclear button just to show how tough he is.

Astrologically, we are at a closing phase of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle. This cycle governs wordly events, and its phase suggests that nothing really new can happen until the conjunction in late 2020, just before the next inauguration. President Carter was elected under the closing square, and Bill Clinton's second term, engulfed as it was by the comedy of the Monica Lewinsky affair, also began under the closing square.

Inauguration Charts 2017 and 2021: Click to Enlarge
Furthermore, the Presidential Inauguration chart for 20 Jan 2017 has an unaspected Sun, again suggesting a leader who cannot get much done. The chart for 20 Jan 2021 is quite different, very dynamic, but that will be another story, and it is unlikely to be Hillary or Trump.

--------------------
Ad Break: I offer skype astrology readings (£60 full reading, £40 for an update). Contact: BWGoddard1(at)aol.co.uk
---------------------
 
So there it is. Astrologically, it seems to me to be more likely to be Trump who will win. And that seems like an awful prospect. It may not be. It will probably be the case that he can't get much done, because he has shown an inability to work with members of his own party, let alone the opposition. But he will be a loose cannon who doesn't follow the rules, he will continue to do things that make jaws drop. With the US Progressed Mercury stationary direct, he may occasion America thinking about itself in a way that the same-old of Hillary would not.

It will be awful that such a man is leading the US. But the astrology says to me that the reality of it won't be as bad as we might fear.

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Why Donald Trump will be the next US President



If Donald Trump becomes President of the USA, he will be the first to do so who has neither held political office nor been in the military. BUT he has been the star of a long-running reality TV show (The Apprentice), which nowadays gives the necessary gravitas. This as Saturn (reality, political leaders) squares Neptune (show business). And, as they say, politics is show business for ugly people - or at least, for people with strange hair styles.

To judge whether someone is likely to get elected as a leader, I look for 2 things: firstly, is their chart being empowered by transits, not just at present but during their subsequent term of office? And have they got more charisma than the other guy? It sounds ridiculously simple, but it always seems to be the guy with the charisma who wins. Clinton vs Bush sr, Bush jr vs Gore, Obama vs Hillary/McCain. Charisma is the ability to connect with people, it is a Venus quality, and the guys you don't like can have it just as much as the guys you do like.


First of all, Hillary Clinton. We don't know her birth time, but with her Sun at 3 Scorpio and her Moon at the end of Pisces (and Venus in mid Scorpio), she has no major transits coming up (maybe to her Angles if we knew them, but that alone probably isn't enough). So my first prediction is that Hillary will not be the Democratic candidate, let alone the next President. Transits apart, she doesn't have the charisma factor either - a lot of people find her hard to like, even if they agree with her politically.

--------------------
Ad Break: I offer skype astrology readings (£60 full reading, £40 for an update). Contact: BWGoddard1(at)aol.co.uk
---------------------
Hillary has Venus in charismatic Scorpio, but it is square to Mars-Saturn-Pluto in Leo, giving her a hardness and aggression that overwhelms the Venus - her charisma probably only peeps out at quiet moments when there are no battles to be fought.


The only other serious Democratic contender is Bernie Sanders. There is some doubt over his birth time, but even so his Sun is experiencing an opposition from Neptune, and his Venus-Moon opposition has hard transits from both Uranus and Pluto. So this guy is in the game, and will probably be the Democratic candidate. If he does become President, it will be just for one term, as his transits will run out of steam, as will he, being nearly 80 by then.

Bernie Sanders
Then of course there is Donald Trump. He has Saturn hard-aspecting his Sun and Moon and North Node through to the end of 2017, and then Neptune starts to move in on his Sun, Moon and Node, admittedly from some distance, but that can easily be enough.


This is the man who wants to ban Muslims from entering the US, and to build a giant wall along the US-Mexican border. This is very Saturn. He also wants to 'make America great' again (as if it wasn't already the world's most powerful country) and this theme of redemption points to the future influence of Neptune on his chart.


Neptune is also influencing Sanders' chart, and it is more immediate, but here the meaning is I think to be found in his feeling for the ordinary American struggling to survive in the face of the greed of Wall St and big business. Neptune is also associated with socialism, which Sanders leans towards. He does not present himself as a redeemer in the Neptunian personality-cult sense that Trump does.


Donald Trump
Trump is the latest representative in the lineage of paranoid politics in the US, that whips up a fear of enemies from within, that began with the Salem witch trials, then continued later with a fear of Catholics and the Irish, then the Communists in the McCarthy era and now the Muslims, stirred up by Trump.


One of Trump's great strengths astrologically is that his Sun-Moon opposition in Gemini-Sag lies along (or near enough) the US Asc-Desc axis (Sibly Chart), while Trump's Desc at 29 Aquarius is 2 degrees off the US Moon at 27 Aquarius, making him very close to the American people, they feel he is one of their own. Sanders does not have this close connection: he is therefore more like an outsider looking in, able to see in a way that Trump can't, but he doesn't belong like Trump does. Trump is  a wasp (the German Drumpf family), Sanders has Jewish ancestry.


Trump is a few weeks older than that other wasp, George W Bush. Both have North Node in Gemini conjunct Uranus, describing the maverick, charismatic, right-wing quality they share. Both are from wealthy backgrounds, giving the sense of entitlement that can come with Leo Rising (which they also share), that perhaps makes it easier to dismiss others not just as inferior but as enemies.

This election is taking place in the closing stages of the Uranus-Pluto square, which has been with us since about 2009. This square traditionally brings political extremes (the last square was in the 1930s). In the UK we have it with the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour party. He is very popular, very left wing, and generally seen as unelectable.

And in the US both Trump and Sanders are at the extreme end of their respective parties. Like Corbyn, Sanders is very popular. But he is socialist, and the American electorate doesn't do socialism.

This year we also have a square from Saturn in Sag to Neptune in Pisces, that impacts on the US Sibly Asc at 12 Sag. And we can see both planets in the campaigns of Sanders and Trump. In the case of Saturn, Sanders wants to see proper governance of big business and to rebuild the infrastructure, whereas Trump plays of the fears (Saturn) of foreigners (Sagittarius) and wants to build walls. It is also the Saturn opposition of 9/11 (which also strikingly impacted the US Asc-Desc with Saturn-Pluto lying along it), so it is a time when fears can be played on. And it is Trump who has the close relationship with the US Asc.

So for 5 reasons, I think that Trump will beat Sanders: he has more personal charisma (Sanders has more integrity, but that's not the same thing); his chart is far closer to the US chart; America doesn't do socialism; the fear factor is big and probably decisive right now; and it is the Republicans' 'turn' after 8 years of a Democratic Presidency.

Monday, December 22, 2008

The US Need for Royalty

Maybe I’m just a Brit looking in, but US politics seems much more dynastic than what we have over here. This is ironic, as the USA was founded on the idea of rejecting European ideas of inherited power, and the lack of true representation that goes with that.

So in the US you have your Kennedys and Bushs and Clintons, and members of these families have a much greater chance of becoming a Senator or Governor, or even running for President, than your average person. And these families are looked up to and lionised. This is why there is currently such a fuss about the possibility of Caroline Kennedy becoming a Senator, as her uncle Edward Kennedy fades from politics. She has never shown an interest in politics before now.

Of course an interest in politics, like anything, is likely to run in families. So in the UK you will get MPs whose father, say, was in Parliament. But an MP is not a big deal. You don’t get noticed unless you are a Minister or leader of the Opposition. Hilary Benn, son of Tony, is Minister for the Environment, but even then you’d hardly notice him bumbling along in his glasses. Peter Mandelson, the Business Secretary, is grandson of Herbert Morrison, a post-war Cabinet Minister, but not many people seem to know this.

I think the difference is that in the UK we have a monarchy. The Queen is the repository for people’s need for these semi-divine, regal figures to look up to. This means that the politicians, who actually run the country, can be elected on their merits rather than their name.

As I have said before, I think the US needs a King or a Queen. A decadent family with gangster origins like the Kennedys would suit. Just like our British royal family: it's French founder, William I, was effectively a gangster. It would not only help deal with the falsity of these family dynasties: it would also take a lot of pressure off the Presidents to be superhuman, and let them get on with their work. So Bill Clinton had a blow-job off an intern, and then quite naturally denied it. There would probably have been a lot less fuss if he didn’t also have to carry the semi-divine aura that comes with the President’s job.

The UK has Sun in Capricorn. We understand that humanity organises itself hierarchically, that collectively we are like a pack of dogs sniffing around after sex and status. Through our powerless monarchy, and its occasional soap-operas, we take care of a good deal of that need.

The US has Sun square to Saturn. Saturn is the ruler of Capricorn. So the US has an uneasy (square) relationship with hierarchy. In its Declaration of Independence it is in denial of this fact, it claims that everyone is created equal (Saturn in Libra). If you deny something, it goes unconscious and comes out worse than it would have been. From the word go, the hierarchy between black and white people in the USA was worse than anything we had in the UK. Nowadays, the worship of money and celebrity, the division of society into winners and losers, is much more extreme than in the UK.

You can’t fault the founding fathers for wanting a more egalitarian society, based on merit rather than inheritance. Saturn was in Libra in 1776, which was a great time for ideals of fairness. But when squared to the Sun you will also get the down-side of Libra, which is ignorance of, or disregard for the nature of ordinary, ‘base’, humanity. The way the US treats its Presidents shows what a deep longing there is in the country for a monarch. Saturn in Libra may not think very highly of this, but Sun in tribal Cancer sure wants it. Natal Pluto in hierarchical Capricorn says acknowledge this about yourself or I will be your Shadow, your undoing.

Anyway, in a few weeks time Americans have a Coronation to look forward to. Whoops, I meant Inauguration.


Site Meter

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Barack Obama and the Collective Shadow

Despite repeated predictions to the contrary by the self-styled UK’s No 1 Astrologer , it’s now looking pretty certain that Hillary Clinton will not make it to the White House. This is because Obama’s lead in the Democratic nomination race is looking increasingly unassailable, and the calls to Hillary Clinton to stand down are growing. According to the Huffington Post on Sunday, the second stage of voting in Texas is likely to increase the gap to nearly 600 delegates, with Obama on 1858 and Hillary on 1270.

In a sense what matters is that it has been a great contest. It reminds me of the Borg-McEnroe matches at Wimbledon in the late seventies, when you had two great champions battling it out for hours and hours. In a sense, it didn’t matter who won, though of course it mattered absolutely to each of the contestants, as it has to. What mattered was that each of them had been tested to their utmost, bringing us moments of brilliance, and this is what awes us as spectators. And it’s been a bit like this with Clinton-Obama, two worthy candidates giving their all for a great prize, with the whole world watching over a period of months, under a prolonged Mars-Pluto opposition. Indeed, as the contest reached its first peak on Feb 5th (Super Tuesday), Mars in the sky could be seen to station between the tips of the horns of the Bull. What an omen!

Obama has been Borg, the cool restrained one, whereas the McEnroe vitriol has lain more with the Clinton camp. Though not everyone likes Hillary, even as the loser she will emerge with increased stature for the battle she has fought, she will receive a standing ovation that will be genuine and earned at the Democratic Convention.

In the last few days Mars has finally moved out of opposition to Pluto, and will this Friday (4th April) complete the retrograde cycle that began last November. So it is possible that Hillary will stand down sooner than we think, as the planetary configuration governing this battle comes to an end. Even if she doesn't stand down, there is likely to be a growing sense that the contest is over.

Obama’s journey so far can be seen in Jungian archetypal terms, with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright being, in my opinion, Obama’s greatest benefactor during this period.

What we find in Jungian psychology is the journey from Young Hero to Wise Old Man, and necessary encounters with the Shadow and Anima, or Feminine, along the way. These encounters deepen the Young Hero, who begins with wonderful ideals, and a desire to complete some enormous task that will save the world (this is my way of putting it, not Jung’s.) But he is naïve, he sees the world in black and white terms, good guys versus bad guys. He, of course, is aligned with the Good. (I’m putting all this in male terms for now, but it translates quite easily into female terms).

It was during this naïve Young Hero phase that we encountered Obamania, when the saintly saviour archetype was projected strongly onto him by many people, and not just by young or uneducated people either. There was rightly a reaction in the opposite direction by many other people.

And then, as Pluto stationed in March, we heard the voice of the Underworld, of America’s Shadow in the form of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s long-time pastor. He vomited out great gobbets of unwelcome truth: "We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye...and now we are indignant, because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

And again: “And the United States of America government, when it came to treating her citizens of Indian descent, she failed. She put them on reservations... When it came to putting the citizens of African descent fairly, America failed... The government put them on slave quarters...Put them in inferior schools... Put them in the lower paying jobs. Put them outside the equal protection of the law. Kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education, and locked them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness. The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three strike law and then wants us to sing God Bless America. Naw, naw, naw. Not God Bless America. God Damn America! That's in the Bible. For killing innocent people. God Damn America for treating us citizens as less than human. God Damn America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is Supreme.”

Pluto was not just stationing: he was opposite Obama’s natal Venus in Cancer. Venus is to do with both personal relationships and, in a politician, popular appeal, the relationship with the electorate. And Cancer concerns home and family and tribe. So it was a potent brew for Obama personally. He was being called upon to acknowledge his origins, his roots, his tribe, and the way they see their country.

“God damn America.”

It doesn’t get much more shadow than this. Yet how can you love your country if you don’t also detest its flaws? What does it mean to say you love your country if you paint out the bits you don’t like? Obama performed a pretty nifty dance in his response to the release of the Wright video. He gave a speech, “We the people, in order to form a more perfect union.” He said some good, inspiring stuff in his usual, eloquent way, and it was good politics.

And he made it clear that though he denounced in the strongest possible way Wright’s views, he did not disown the man (laughter). My laughter is sympathetic. When a man like Wright holds a view so strongly, you cannot separate the man from the view. He IS his views. So in not disowning Wright, Obama is being true to his origins and, despite himself, true to a certain way of seeing America, true to a side of himself that he had not wanted to volunteer to the public until he was forced to by Wright. Whatever Obama might have said in response to Wright, however movingly and genuinely and passionately and eloquently he wriggled, the fact is that Obama has been around this man for 20 years and has considered him his spiritual mentor. That history speaks far louder than anything Obama might now say.

To me it says that almost despite himself, Obama can be trusted, that he genuinely is a voice for unity and not for polarisation. In politics, polarisation is the norm. You win your appeal in part by standing for one section of the population against another. Like George Bush, who seemed not to care about the fate of New Orleans, in a way that would have been inconceivable had it been say Boston. Like the Tory party in the UK, who tend to favour the rich over the poor. Or Labour, who in the past were the opposite. In England, it is now the upper classes who are demonised, who are seen as fair game for ridicule. You cannot do this to the ‘working classes’. (I recently read that in the US it is easier to talk about race than about class).

I think it is remarkable for a politician to acknowledge a country’s shadow without one-sidedly identifying with it. And in Obama’s case, his Venus in Cancer is conjunct the US Venus in Cancer. So via the current Pluto transit to them both, Obama's shadow and the American Collective Shadow are connected, he can articulate it and authentically speak for it. The Shadow is what we are ashamed of. To some extent Obama is ashamed of his roots, as he was forced into speaking about them. But he has in his own way acknowledged his roots, and people are still voting for him. This means that in some way America also is acknowledging its Shadow, which is a profound and wonderful event.

So Obama has passed the test, and has gained stature. He is no longer merely the angel of light come to save America, there is now something difficult and unstraightforward about him that gives him depth.

As for the other 2 archetypes, the Anima and the Wise Old Man, it is interesting how they all seem to be appearing very clearly around Obama. We’ve seen Wright and the Shadow, but we also have Hillary Clinton as the Anima, and the ‘Wise Old Man’ John McCain. I’m not sure how these figures work for Obama, but he has certainly had a full-on encounter with the Anima through Hillary. She may not be conventionally feminine, but she is certainly female of a certain type, and love her or hate her, Obama has had to deal with her and probably learn from her. He has yet to do battle with John McCain, but McCain is his own man, and will not be a pushover.

So it is as though, looked at in Jungian terms, the process of (possibly) becoming President is also a process of psychological integration for Barack Obama, which can only be a good thing.


Site Meter

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Women and Power: Advice from the Ape-World.

I think the way political power is handed out these days almost guarantees that you’ll get the wrong sort of person for the job. Guiding a society is an onerous responsibility, it has nothing to do with personal ‘achievement’, you need to be old enough to have got that out of your system. The person or people offered the job need to be chosen by a broad church of people who know the candidates well, and who themselves know what it takes to govern a country. It is a specialist job like any other; you wouldn’t appoint a brain surgeon through a popular vote. What we have is practically the worst system imaginable, where leaders are chosen from an undignified scramble of candidates who desperately want the job, and who are chosen largely by people (you and I) who know very little of what it takes to govern a country, and with very little knowledge of the candidates. This is what we call Democracy, on which the west prides itself so much, and which much of the rest of the world scorns – in many ways, rightly.

But if you do want to take part in this undignified scramble, and you are female, here is some advice by Frans de Waal in New Scientist magazine, entitled ‘Midnight Tips for the Clinton Camp’. The author has spent many years observing chimpanzees, and after telling us about their hierarchies, she continues:

'Here are three lessons for alpha females in human politics. First, age helps a female more than a male. Since physical strength and stamina are largely irrelevant in the female, becoming older, experienced and better connected offers an advantage. I have never seen a middle-aged female at the top of a hierarchy if older females were present. In human politics, too, a typical alpha female is post-reproductive, such as Indira Gandhi, Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel.

‘Second, since males respect power more than age or personality, the alpha female must head a large coalition to handle them effectively. Tight control of her political party might provide this in human politics, but it is unlikely any female could have a stable top role without support from her sex. This can only be secured by being sexually non-threatening and championing female causes.

And third, an alpha female needs to rise above the parties. Older female primates often head large families, and have a natural tendency to be loyal and committed to their kin. The effective alpha female needs to be able to reach beyond her inner circle, build bridges, groom rivals, all of which comes harder to females than males, because males lead more opportunistic political lives and therefore have shorter memories for perceived slights. So impartiality may be the greatest challenge for any female politician.

That the rules of the game are different for both sexes seems ‘unfair’, but is simply how evolution works. Male reproductive success depends on access to females, and one way to achieve this is to hold power over other males. A connection between sex and power is well-known in human politics. For females, things don’t work the same for the simple reason that increased access to mates doesn’t help them reproduce one bit. Instead of serving reproduction via sex, female power serves reproduction via access to resources.

This is important, too, which is why an interest in power is not limited to male primates. Yet the reasons are not the same, and the interplay with sex is so different that advising Clinton to act more ‘feminine’ is misguided. When Clinton shed one tear during an interview, everyone was moved and the media said that finally we saw the real person behind the candidate. But when she went on to shed more tears during a second interview, the headline read: “Again?”, while her opponents countered that Barack Obama “doesn’t go on television and have crying fits.”

Another miscalculation, this time in her favour, came when sexist hecklers in New Hampshire shouted at Clinton: “Iron my shirt! Iron my shirt!” which galvanised the female vote in her favour. Of the three lessons, then, my money says any alpha female’s ticket to success is solidarity with her own gender.


Site Meter