I have just learned that the 2012 election promises to be a repeat of the 2000 election, because of a serious Murphy’s Law type mess that astrologers call Mercury retrograde:

…consider the Bush-Gore 2000 American presidential election in Florida. Now there’s a classic colossal screw-up, and we can point our finger directly at Mercury retrograde.

For reasons best known to the Americans, they chose to have their 2000 presidential election on the exact day when Mercury retrograde energy peaked, called stationary direct. Oh, my goodness. In the end, after weeks of wrangling and legal battles, George W. Bush was declared the winner. History now records what a mess he made of virtually everything he did for the next eight years, a classic Mercury retrograde presidency.

(FWIW, astrologers, too, learned much from that Florida election. For instance, prior to the Florida election I had always thought a dimpled Chad was a good-looking man.)

One might think that after eight years of George W. Bush, the Americans might show a bit of respect for what Mercury retrograde can do to an election. But, no, apparently the Americans didn’t get that message in their 2000 presidential election. Now please recall that the law of karma says if you don’t get the message the first time, the lesson keeps coming back until you do get it. So, the Americans are going to get their noses rubbed in the Mercury retrograde lesson again.

This year’s American presidential election is scheduled to be held on Nov. 6, 2012, the exact day when Mercury is stationary retrograde. Here we go, people, instant replay.

Note two differences between the 2012 and the 2000 elections. The first is that in the 2000 election the Mercury retrograde was at the station which ended the retrograde, and in the 2012 election the Mercury retrograde will be at the station which begins the retrograde. Having made that distinction (which astrologers will relish thoroughly), for the rest of us just understand that both stations can snarl things up enormously. The beginning and ending stations are when the retrograde is the strongest.

The other difference is that in 2000 there was no incumbent running for re-election. It was anyone’s race. In 2012 we have President Obama running for re-election. He’s a Leo and Leos love the imperial limelight. Currently it looks like the Republicans will be nominating Mitt Romney, a Pisces, as their candidate. Should Romney get the official nod, he will in part help significantly to define the electoral snarl up. The other potential snarl up will be the US economy, which is at best shaky. If the American economy continues to be weak through the summer and into the fall (a very real possibility), then the anemic economic situation will play negatively against the incumbent, in this case Obama.

So, how does one say this politely? Oh boy. Anyone for another US presidential election that ends up looking like dog’s breakfast? You read it here first.

I checked the tables elsewhere, and sure enough, Mercury does go retrograde on Election Day.

The astrologer who wrote the above is quite anti-Bush and is most likely an Obama supporter, so he is hardly gloating.

As a pessimist who believes in optimism for entertainment purposes, I don’t know what to say about this.¬†For me, astrology is a form of entertainment, but I had a friend years ago who used to live in horror of Mercury in Retrograde. He would warn in advance, and then he would say “MERC RET! MERC RET!” whenever anything went wrong, which of course anything always did.

The problem is, things always seem to go wrong with or without Merc Ret.

(Yes, I see that statement as a form of optimism.)