posted September 23, 2015 08:49 PM
I see I am going to be the astro-gadfly here again, but I'm used to it. So here goes ...First your article, Astrocholigist. Water and fire. water, yes, this could be a factor in a person being over-sensitive, or as you put it, too 'right brained'. However, water can also be very capable of feeling out trends and undercurrents (Scorpio), human needs and security (Cancer), and compassion (Pisces). At one point 2-3 decades ago, Pisces was the most common or second most common sun sign amongst US Congressmen.
You've overlooked that fire can balance water, and fire is absolutely (by planet or sign) an boost to ambition, ego, and can-do attitudes essential to being an executive and obtaining the top job.
What is locomotion? Fire + water = steam. These folks can absolutely be locomotives. Anytime you put enough energy/fire behind water to move it there can be a lot of power.
I agree that the fixity of heavy Scorpio and Leo in Hillary's chart lends her to be resistant to new ideas. But that did not prevent her husband Bill from being elected. His chart has significant fixity as well, as have many other leaders.
However, you have posted a DD-rated chart for Hillary. DD is the rating of lowest reliability for recorded birth time/Asc figure, after only X. How is it you can proceed then to deliniations along house lines without at least some serious justification for this chart with Scorpio rising?
Things get muddy from there, so I won't go through a litany of questions or points of disagreements.
quote:
Originally posted by starmoon:
well, no president has ever had a Scorpio Asc. :-) so i doubt she'll be the first.
Are you certain of that? How can you know this since some of our U.S. Presidents have not even had recorded birth times? According to master astrologer John Willner, William McKinely was Scorpio rising.
quote:
... a majority of elected leaders have Libra or Taurus Asc. because they come across so charming - thanks to Venus. a charming Asc. helps you appear favorable to the public, whether you are qualified or not.
Actually, I have researched public figures in American politics, as well as the USA's political trends, and genuine Taurus rising individuals are rare in higher levels of elected office (governors, congress, White House). Libra rising is quite common, however, partly for the basic reason you cite -- Venus influence: diplomacy -- but not because they are so slick they can get elected even without qualifications. Capricorn rising and Aries rising are also quite common, as are Sagittarius and Gemini.
It is very difficult to apply rudimentary sign-based astrology to politics and get anywhere. However, we do know that not a single U.S. President has ever had Moon in Pisces. You can look this up for yourself in ADB. Nor has any that I can find had Mars in Pisces.
Pisces acts as an achilles heel for people in the public view. Attaining the highest and hardest to get job in the USA (as it exists now) is just not something those folks are cut out for.
Fred Bickum did research to find out what is most common among winning presidential candidates and discovered that the Aquarian signature, or at least some factors in Aquarius comes up often; Mercury/Mars/Pluto combinations come up often; Cardinal signs over the angles (of a properly and fully validated chart), or the Sag/Gem axis; angular house interception, especially 1st/7th; factors positioned at extremes of declination (22*+).
This is not to say there are not other factors, but this is what he gleaned from a study of actual validated charts for U.S. presidents. Not DD-rated charts, not X, C, B, or even A or AA-rated charts, but fully validated charts.
So to complete my gadfly role, I urge to to study! before coming to conclusions (or indulging your person or political prejudices). If you've got an opinion on the subject, then you've got interest, which is the basis for further study and greater knowledge.
------------------
The Declinations Guy
Complete Rising Sign Descriptions