Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Are the Stars Aligned for an Obama Victory? Astrology and U.S. Presidential Elections

Bookmark and Share

Presidential nominees born under Leo (e.g. Obama) win at a 71 percent clip with Geminis (e.g. Gingrich) coming in at just 29 percent

barackobama05.jpgWith job approval numbers languishing in the low 40s, a still elevated unemployment rate of 8.6 percent, and a national debt recently eclipsing $15 trillion, the numbers do not look promising for a Barack Obama reelection victory in 2012.

At least most numbers.

But there is one sign indicating good news for Obama next year - particularly if his Republican opponent is former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

His astrological sign.

A Smart Politics historical review of presidential elections finds that candidates who were born under the president's sign - Leo - have a better winning percentage (71 percent) than those born under any other sign except for Taurus (75 percent).

(Note: All major party nominees or third party presidential candidates who received a substantial percentage of the vote or carried at least one state were analyzed).

Obama was born on August 4th, which puts him in the middle of the Leo astrological period.

Leos have won five presidential elections in U.S. history and lost just two, or 71 percent, including victories in three of the last five cycles with Democrats Bill Clinton (1992, 1996) and Obama (2008).

Other Leos to win the White House are Republicans Benjamin Harrison (in 1888) and Herbert Hoover (in 1928).

Harrison and Hoover are also the only two major presidential candidates born under Leo to lose a general election bid (in 1892 to Grover Cleveland and 1932 to FDR respectively).

The only general election candidates who have a better track record than Leos are Tauruses - winning six out of eight contests, or 75 percent of the time.

Winning candidates born under Taurus are James Monroe (1816, 1820), James Buchanan (1856), Ulysses Grant (1868, 1872), and Harry Truman (1948) with Democrats Stephen Douglas (1860) and Alton Parker (1904) the only ones to suffer defeat.

That's great news if you're Rick Santorum, a Taurus born on May 10, 1958.

The one problem for the former Pennsylvania U.S. Senator is that he ranks at or near the bottom in virtually every state and national poll and has perhaps the longest odds to make it onto the general election ballot next November to give him the opportunity to flex his Taurus muscles.

With Santorum out of the mix, Obama, to be sure, would be more than happy to throw his lot all in for an astrological dice roll in the 2012 race.

Particularly if the GOP nominee is Newt Gingrich - a Gemini.

A Gemini has won the presidency just twice, against five losses, or 29 percent of the time.

Geminis on the short end of the vote tally include Democrat Winfield Scott (1852), Democrat Horatio Seymour (1868), Progressive Robert LaFollette (1924), Democrat Hubert Humphrey (1968), and Republican incumbent George H.W. Bush (1992).

The two victorious Geminis are John Kennedy (1960) and George H.W. Bush (1988).

Overall, Geminis have the second worst winning percentage in presidential elections among the 12 astrological signs.

Unfortunately for the candidacies of Michele Bachmann (born April 6th) and Jon Huntsman (March 26th), their astrological prospects for a successful presidential bid are even worse.

Aries have tallied a dismal 2-11 record in general election contests - the worst of all astrological signs at just 15 percent.

Even worse, Aries currently have the longest dry spell of the 12 signs - failing to see one of their own elected president over the last 207 years dating back to Thomas Jefferson in 1804.

Since the election of Jefferson to a second term, failed Aries bids include Federalist Rufus King (1816), Whig Henry Clay (1824, 1844), Republican Charles Evans Hughes (1916), Democrat James Cox (1920), Democrat John Davis (1924), Republican Thomas Dewey (1944, 1948), and Democrat Al Gore (2000).

It has also been a particularly unlucky cycle to be a Sagittarius, with Tim Pawlenty (born November 27th) and Herman Cain (December 13th) two of the first three candidates to drop out of the race.

The third - Thaddeus McCotter - is a Leo like President Obama and Ron Paul.

There has never been a Leo vs. Leo showdown for the White House before and, as the mathematical odds would suggest, two candidates squaring off with the same astrological sign in the general election has been a rarity, happening just four times:

· Pisces: In 1808, with James Madison and Charles Pinckney.

· Pisces: In 1812, with James Madison and DeWitt Clinton.

· Aquarius: In 1860, with Abraham Lincoln and John Bell.

· Aquarius: In 1940, with FDR and Wendell Wilkie.

And as for the remaining Republican hopefuls, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, astrology gives them a bit better than a puncher's chance at winning the presidency if they become their party's nominee.

Pisces have won eight presidential elections against nine defeats, although the last Pisces to win the White House was Democrat Grover Cleveland in 1892.

Winning Percentage by Astrological Sign in U.S. Presidential Elections

Sign
GOP hopefuls
Won
Lost
%
Last win
Taurus
Santorum
6
2
75.0
1948
Leo
Paul, McCotter*
5
2
71.4
2008
Libra
Roemer
4
2
66.7
1976
Scorpio
5
3
62.5
1920
Aquarius
11
10
52.4
1984
Pisces
Perry, Romney
8
9
47.1
1892
Sagittarius
Cain*, Pawlenty*
3
4
42.9
1852
Capricorn
Johnson
4
6
40.0
1972
Cancer
4
7
36.4
2004
Virgo
2
4
33.3
1964
Gemini
Gingrich
2
5
28.6
1988
Aries
Bachmann, Huntsman
2
11
15.4
1804
* Exited 2012 presidential race. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Snubbed Again: Ron Paul Surges in Iowa and the Media Yawns
Next post: Is Newt Gingrich Too Old to Beat Barack Obama?

1 Comment


  • You may not wonder if astro horoscope helps Obama victory. Even in ancient Egypts influence of stars was well known.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting