Contact Janet Booth to find your True Direction with the Stars

November 2, 2014

Non-Traditional Predictive Indicators for 2014 Mid-Term Elections
Offer Hope to Democrats

The 2014 mid-terms have been called “the most suspenseful election we’ve had in a long time” by Steve Kornacki on MSNBC (on his show Up With Steve Kornacki, 11/2/14). No doubt that the number of Senate seats being defended by Democrats is much higher than Republican-held seats, giving the GOP the advantage. But two predictors examined for presidential elections concur that the incumbent party wins the day in the mid-term contest this year. This is contrary to poli sci conventional wisdom that the party of a president with an unfavorable approval rating should lose and that the incumbent party usually has a set-back midway through a second term. The National League won the World Series and the Redskins won their home game prior to the election, both signifiers with a significantly higher than 50-50 success rate at predicting presidential election winners. Granted, both these wins were squeakers. The Giants won on the road, in a nail-biter finish in the 9th inning of game 7. The Skins’ victory came down to the last play as time ran out, in a come-from-behind drive led by a back-up QB. The implication for the 2014 election: a scary, uncertain win for Democrats that may not be clear on election night.

Nate Silver, who has a very good track record in his sports and political predictions, gives Republicans a greater probability of the Senate. Polls are showing a better shot for the Republicans to take the Senate but according to election analyst, Princeton professor Sam Wang, “When errors occur, the outcome tends to be more favorable to the Democrats.”1 His recent (Oct. 21, 2014) article proclaims, “The Data Favors Democrats,”2 although this article looks at governors’ races rather than the Senate. Keep your eye on Wang’s numbers; his techniques were right for every Senate race in 2012.3 Yet even he warns, “midterm-year polling is far less accurate than Presidential-year polling.”4

Astrology may provide another clue. The Moon’s sign and any angular connections it makes to other planets are thought to show the collective mood of the people and which way the wind of public opinion is blowing. (For instance, the Moon’s signs and connections many times correlate with movements in the stock market, which respond to emotions.) The election day Moon is in Aries, a freedom-oriented, impulsive sign, often showing anger. Voters are fed up and want to take action. Voter turn-out should be higher than in average for mid-term elections, which usually gives Democrats an advantage. The Moon is in an abrasive position relative to planets that signify conservative values5 while harmonizing with more progressive-oriented planets.6 Furthermore, the Republican-leaning links are either fading or over early in the day, whereas the Democratic-friendly connections occur later in the day. Thus the mood moves away from conservatives and toward liberals, and inclining the results in the Democrats’ direction. The condition associated with the recounts in 2000 is not present. 7 Still, with so many close races, all results may not be determined promptly.





5 A harsh connection (called a “sesquiquadrate,” a 135° angle) to Saturn occurs before the polls open, thus indicates a fading emotion. Early in the day, the Moon is “square” (90° away from) Pluto in Capricorn (the sign ruled by Saturn). Saturnian archetypes are nay-sayers, obstructionists, stodgy old men and authority figures. Of course, Pluto signifies a Plutocratic party, ruled by the rich.

6 The Moon passes the planet of the masses, Uranus, mid-way through the day. All day long, the Moon moves into the most favorable link (a 120° “trine”) to Jupiter, the planet that most inclines people to be open-minded and generous.

7 Mercury Retrograde, the planet of information exchange in apparent backward motion, is famous for communication mix-ups.

Janet Booth © Nov. 2, 2014