US Presidential Election - Erin's call?

[Claradonna]

So it's going to be another close race!

For the 2000 election, you wrote that Al Gore was 'supposed' to win, rather than Bush.


Who do you forsee will win in 2008, Erin?

And what implications for events in the US and the world?

[The David]

I assume Obama. If Erin gets a message that McCain is supposed to win, then she'll have to reconsider everything her spirits have ever told her.

When I saw this thread, I thought it was about Erin running for president. And I thought, hey, with all the women running in this election...

[supertom]

i remember reading silvia brown, and she said that a president elected in 2008 will die of a heart attack in office, and mccain is pretty old, the book was published in 2005.

[Gene]

Originally Posted by supertom

i remember reading silvia brown, and she said that a president elected in 2008 will die of a heart attack in office, and mccain is pretty old, the book was published in 2005.

And Sarah would become the first woman President, ducking and runing for cover even though this is not a political statement of any kind.

The statement that the President elected in 2008 will die in office of a heart attack "feels" true to me.

[Erin Pavlina]

I do worry about McCain's health, and I don't think Sarah Palin is ready to be president.

I'm not sure who will actually win because there's a lot of free will involved here. But I can see the effects of both paths.

I'll probably do a blog entry on this topic so everyone can benefit. Stay tuned...

[carenkh]

Unfortunately, you don't have to be old to have a heart attack. Either candidate is vulnerable.

I also feel strongly that whomever is elected will not serve out their term - but that could just be my fear that because Obama is who he is, he is a target for assassination.

[Technicolor Tim]

Originally Posted by supertom

i remember reading silvia brown, and she said that a president elected in 2008 will die of a heart attack in office, and mccain is pretty old, the book was published in 2005.

I'm very skeptical of this Sylvia Browne character. Her reputation certainly hasn't helped serious psychics gain much credibility. The word 'fraud' comes to mind, so I'm not sure I'd really care what she said about anything.

The best psychic I know of (like, worldwide) is actually a girl from my hometown. Her readings have been incredibly amazing and accurate. I'll ask her who'll win - and I might take some money to the bookies next.

[Claradonna]

Not Sylvia Browne!! Here are her past election predictions



From what I see in the world right now, the 'feel' of art and the zeitgeist, is that people are ready for change. Obama is definitely on that wavelength, being open, new, and bright. It's pretty easy to read in the leader cells of the human population as a whole, that the zeitgeist wants to push to something new and hopeful. I predict (and hope) that it is Obama.


McCain, symbolically and metaphorically, symbolizes what is 'dead' with American culture. If he were to be elected, that would pretty much be the nail on the coffin for now. Until America can be resurrected, perhaps in a later incarnation..



Anyways, Erin previously said that Gore was supposed to win. That is the path, but that the people's (or court's) free will changed that.


So, if Erin can see for this election too, what is the outcome as it is currently written?

What do the spirits say?

[supertom]

i also think Sylvia Browne is a fake, or that she has some abilities, but over-hypes it. I remember steve and erin, saw at "i can do it" and they though that she was the real deal.

I Can Do It! Conference Review - Day 1

[Erin Pavlina]

We thought she was accurate in regards to Steve. That's all we can say with confidence

As for the election I don't know who is going to win. I'm not picking up on that broadcast channel. One thing I'm picking up though is that Obama will not be as effective as his supporters think and McCain will not be as bad as his detractors fear.

[Bliss Sage]

Obama

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

I'm not sure who will actually win because there's a lot of free will involved here.

I'm curious, why would the effects of free will interfere with being able to feel who will win?

[seeker5]

Erin, how do you feel about Obama now, having seen him for 6 more months or so since you voted for him in the Primary?

I'm asking since it seems to me that in the past 6 months, he's had to delve a lot more into much lower-energy type of speeches. I'm sure that's due to going into a general election mode against McCain, however, I'm curious to hear your take on it if you're willing to share it.

[Erin Pavlina]

I think Obama has great intentions. I'm not sure his power is high enough to accomplish what he'd like to see in the world. Then again, often presidents can't get what they want simply because congress blocks them. I also feel like Obama wasn't as prepared for his success and was somewhat surprised he was doing so well. He ran with it, of course, but personally I think Obama will make a great president later and a less great president now. In other words, I love his intentions but we'll have to see if he can get things done.

McCain doesn't bother me as much as other Republican candidates did. Of all the republican candidates, McCain is the only one I would have considered voting for.

At this point in time I'm not even sure who I'm going to vote for. I prefer Obama the man to McCain the man, but I'm not sure I agree with Obama's socialistic ideas.

I'd like to see a president who can empower the American people, raise their level of awareness, raise their sense of responsibility, and give them courage to follow their passion. I don't like the idea of placating the American people, giving them hand outs. I'd rather see "help up" than a "hand out."

As for who is going to win... I have to go back to Gore/Bush. Gore was "supposed" to win and be our president. But dark forces conspired to get Bush in the white house. Ever since then I've realized predictions don't amount to a hill of beans. There are forces at work which, I believe, make the vote useless.

[fatandugly]

"I'd like to see a president who can empower the American people, raise their level of awareness, raise their sense of responsibility, and give them courage to follow their passion."

Personally, I'd rather see a president who understands foreign policy and responsible leadership.

" I don't like the idea of placating the American people, giving them hand outs. I'd rather see "help up" than a "hand out.""

Just, wow. I don't know what to say. You talk of compassion, yet can blatantly ignore the fact that millions live below the poverty level. You can speak of "hand outs" while ignoring the fact that most of us pay taxes and see no return from it. That "hand out" is not coming from the government. It is coming from us. What kind of country is it when we don't take care of our own? We are one earth, one people, and what affects one, affects many. From your standpoint of having plenty of money, and a two income family, it is easy to judge others. I am disappointed in seeing this attitude coming from you. In an abundant world, there is plenty for everyone, and plenty to share. There are no handouts. Past presidents have already slashed funding for any social help projects. People are homeless, dying from lack of medical care that should be available to all, receiving no help for mental illness, and dying in useless bloody wars. I can't believe your attitude.

[Erin Pavlina]

I'm pretty sure you didn't understand my point, though I'm not sure you want to. It seems like you prefer to just be disappointed.

I totally believe in helping others, but not by having them sit at home and watch tv while other people foot their bills. I'm about empowering people to contribute and receive value for their contribution, not mooch off the hard work of others. It's the whole, "give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for life" ideal. I have no problem with a social support system. I have a problem when we choose to help those who are unwilling to help themselves. I'm not talking about those who are unable to help themselves (for them we should give them what they need). I'm talking about those who are unwilling but able. Do you see my point now or do you still want to be disappointed?

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

I think Obama has great intentions. I'm not sure his power is high enough to accomplish what he'd like to see in the world. Then again, often presidents can't get what they want simply because congress blocks them. I also feel like Obama wasn't as prepared for his success and was somewhat surprised he was doing so well. He ran with it, of course, but personally I think Obama will make a great president later and a less great president now. In other words, I love his intentions but we'll have to see if he can get things done.

Thanks for the thoughtful answer.

McCain doesn't bother me as much as other Republican candidates did. Of all the republican candidates, McCain is the only one I would have considered voting for.

Oh? I'm surprised by that, considering he seemed the most pro-Iraq war Republican running.

I'd like to see a president who can empower the American people, raise their level of awareness, raise their sense of responsibility, and give them courage to follow their passion. I don't like the idea of placating the American people, giving them hand outs. I'd rather see "help up" than a "hand out."

Sounds nice . Have we ever had a president like that?

As for who is going to win... I have to go back to Gore/Bush. Gore was "supposed" to win and be our president. But dark forces conspired to get Bush in the white house. Ever since then I've realized predictions don't amount to a hill of beans. There are forces at work which, I believe, make the vote useless.

What do you mean there are forces at work which make the vote useless? Do you mean an individual's vote, or the whole voting thing as a whole?

[Athena]

The president will either be giving money to the people, or to a war.

Why would you rather support the latter?

Also, why would Obama see difficulty in legislation? Both houses are in a Democratic majority.


And, everything in life has multiple influencing factors. But isn't the psychic view supposed to see from the top down? How would you be able to give a decisive personal reading, but not a presidential one?

[Erin Pavlina]

When I do a personal reading I am in tune with a single individual's spirit guides. Who exactly would I tune in to regarding a countrywide election?

There are plenty of psychics who can tune in to the time stream and make predictions on what is going to happen globally. I am not one of them. My gifts are intuitive insights for individual people to help them grow, progress, get on track, and be happy. I don't care if Brad and Angelina are going to marry, or if Justin and Jessica will still be together next year.

I don't support giving money to the war either.

I support the American people being financially responsible, and I support our President being responsible with our tax money. If we can't afford something, as a country, we shouldn't buy it. I support spending more money on education instead of defense. I support finding a way for everyone to get the healthcare they need but not at the expense of others.

@seeker: forces at work... I'm talking about fear entities on the other side of the veil who have an agenda and put people in place to create more fear. I honestly believe Gore was supposed to be president and that Bush's being president altered the time stream.

[Athena]

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

When I do a personal reading I am in tune with a single individual's spirit guides. Who exactly would I tune in to regarding a countrywide election?

Can you tune in to Obama's or McCain's guides and make the same predictions that individuals have about their intended path?

From the look of it, McCain doesn't spirit doesn't seem to be very strong in this endeavor. Besides seeming physically weak, and mentally, there is no spark in his eye when he speaks, and in his actions, it looks as though he's going through the motions. Doing things like giving up states, or deciding that he wants to skip a debate, seem like his spirit is not really in it.


Obama seems much more alive, not just physically, but in how he talks, carries himself, his energy, the light in his eyes, and his actions. His spirit seems to be much more alive in this endeavor.

There are plenty of psychics who can tune in to the time stream and make predictions on what is going to happen globally. I am not one of them. My gifts are intuitive insights for individual people to help them grow, progress, get on track, and be happy.

That's interesting.

So, certain psychics can read the macro-spirit, or Gaia or zeitgeist, of the human body as a whole? And certain ones can read only individual people, or individual cells of the world? Is this by choice, or given talent?

I support the American people being financially responsible, and I support our President being responsible with our tax money. If we can't afford something, as a country, we shouldn't buy it. I support spending more money on education instead of defense. I support finding a way for everyone to get the healthcare they need but not at the expense of others.

@seeker: forces at work... I'm talking about fear entities on the other side of the veil who have an agenda and put people in place to create more fear. I honestly believe Gore was supposed to be president and that Bush's being president altered the time stream.

How did it happen that the plan was altered? Is this the fault of 1 person, or 500 or so people in Florida? I don't really believe in dark-entities either. How can this be explained rationally, how the entire stream of a nation and world could be altered from what it was supposed to be?

[Amandaaa]

I prefer Obama the man to McCain the man, but I'm not sure I agree with Obama's socialistic ideas.

I'd like to see a president who can empower the American people, raise their level of awareness, raise their sense of responsibility, and give them courage to follow their passion. I don't like the idea of placating the American people, giving them hand outs. I'd rather see "help up" than a "hand out."

^I agree wholeheartedly with Erin!

...You said that really well.

[Erin Pavlina]

Athena: Yes different psychics read in different ways. I think to some extent it's a natural ability and to another extent you can increase your ability in an area if you work at it hard enough. I could tune in to Obama's and McCain's guides, though that's an ethical violation for me so I probably won't. My "read" on both guys is that Obama wasn't prepared for the level of success he's achieved; not that he can't handle it, just that he was somewhat surprised, but has adapted well. McCain feels more tired to me but mentally he's more prepared for the reality of the white house and being president than Obama is. Obama would adapt though.

Both men are capable of being president. Obama has greater charisma (obviously) but McCain has a more serene, been-there-done-that energy that could serve him well in the white house.

No matter who wins, we will all gain and lose at the same time. The question will be, what will we gain and what will we lose and how will that impact us personally.

Again I want to say I really like Obama, the man. I think he has serious potential at being a conscious lightworker type. I see McCain as more neutrally aligned.

[Bliss Sage]

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

When I do a personal reading I am in tune with a single individual's spirit guides. Who exactly would I tune in to regarding a countrywide election?

You can tune in to the collective mentality of a people and the collective mood of a nation. I think this tuning-in can take account of any unobvious forces working behind the scene, but maybe you have to be aware of the existence of the forces...I don't know, I'm testing myself still .

Personally, especially after the last debate, now that McCain has started inciting fear and hatred in his supporters for Obama, I have a fearful feeling for Obama's life when he is president. I got that feeling already when Hillary Clinton compared Obama to Robert F. Kennedy, then it sort of faded away, and now it has come back again, stronger. I don't feel that McCain is neutrally aligned at all, though I might have felt so in the past.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Bliss Sage

I don't feel that McCain is neutrally aligned at all..

Me, neither. That one is 100% darkworker, as is his sidekick.

[Bliss Sage]

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

I think Obama has great intentions. I'm not sure his power is high enough to accomplish what he'd like to see in the world. Then again, often presidents can't get what they want simply because congress blocks them. I also feel like Obama wasn't as prepared for his success and was somewhat surprised he was doing so well. He ran with it, of course, but personally I think Obama will make a great president later and a less great president now. In other words, I love his intentions but we'll have to see if he can get things done.

McCain doesn't bother me as much as other Republican candidates did. Of all the republican candidates, McCain is the only one I would have considered voting for.

Btw, I wanted to add, that, although it's true that Obama is fresh and not as experienced, I feel that he is much more ready for the presidency than McCain is. I base that on the fact that McCain changes his mind and his direction as the wind blows, and that's a little unsettling. We will never know what he stands for, because what he says today is obsolete tomorrow. He is more erratic and unstable than even I have been, and that is worrying in a person, but in a potential president, it is more than worrying.

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

At this point in time I'm not even sure who I'm going to vote for. I prefer Obama the man to McCain the man, but I'm not sure I agree with Obama's socialistic ideas.

Speaking as someone who has lived and been gainfully employed in countries with a social safety net...I know what it feels like to work and have unemployed friends living in nicer apartments than I could ever afford because the government helps them out (Finland). I have experienced much worse things than that in life. But aside from that, I don't think we would have to worry right now that things would become that socialized here. Even in Canada, which has the best health care I have experience of, unemployed people don't get even remotely enough money to make ends meet. I was unemployed there and I got all of $125 a month, while the rent was $525. When I got to work at a volunteer position in a daycare there, via the unemployment system, they up-ed my monthly "hand-out" to $320. So I think it is very premature to worry about giving hand-outs and lifetime free rides to the unemployed. I also don't think that is a good reason, with all of the much more urgent problems of this country and problems and crises already caused around the world by this country, to vote for war in Iraq, and most probably in Iran, among other things, if McCain is elected.

Finally, concerning free will and prediction. I think that it is possible to feel an individual or a collective group, along with the dark or light workings of their mind, such that the prediction itself comes into existence based on what is felt in that person or collective group and is, therefore, in actuality, a prediction of the choice they will make in their free will. Thus, the prediction, arrived at through feeling and knowing those involved in the decision, has already taken into consideration the evil or good intentions of those involved and their eventual actions which are done in free will.

[Plastnatic]

Originally Posted by fatandugly

"I'd like to see a president who can empower the American people, raise their level of awareness, raise their sense of responsibility, and give them courage to follow their passion."

Personally, I'd rather see a president who understands foreign policy and responsible leadership.

" I don't like the idea of placating the American people, giving them hand outs. I'd rather see "help up" than a "hand out.""

Just, wow. I don't know what to say. You talk of compassion, yet can blatantly ignore the fact that millions live below the poverty level. You can speak of "hand outs" while ignoring the fact that most of us pay taxes and see no return from it. That "hand out" is not coming from the government. It is coming from us. What kind of country is it when we don't take care of our own? We are one earth, one people, and what affects one, affects many. From your standpoint of having plenty of money, and a two income family, it is easy to judge others. I am disappointed in seeing this attitude coming from you. In an abundant world, there is plenty for everyone, and plenty to share. There are no handouts. Past presidents have already slashed funding for any social help projects. People are homeless, dying from lack of medical care that should be available to all, receiving no help for mental illness, and dying in useless bloody wars. I can't believe your attitude.

I understood what Erin meant. helping those lazy people who are not willing to participate with the rest of society is absolutely not cool in my book.

[crescive]

The mentality that the poor are "lazy" is so disheartening. Have some empathy people, many are in dire circumstances and even people on this forum have problems being optimistic or motivated even when life is good. There are people who are homeless because their houses are being foreclosed on, who have lost their jobs due to the economic crises, there are people who are going through tough times and will continue to do so because history has shaped the demographics to be that way. It's not always because of "laziness."

[Erin Pavlina]

We know not all poor people are lazy.

We do have empathy for those who need help.

We also know there are people out there bilking the system intentionally.

I'd like to see us helping people get jobs and get back on their feet.

[Tobes]

Well irrespective of the exact contents and ideas of each candidate, my "read" is that the consciousness level of the McCain/Palin ticket (and their hard core base) is on the order of a 1 watt bulb! We have already been in the dark ages for enough years now, and I want out!

[kismet]

So when someone is able to "predict" something it is because there is no "free will" involved in that outcome?

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

I honestly believe Gore was supposed to be president and that Bush's being president altered the time stream.

This totally relates to my constant delima and question as to the nature of "fate" that I'm always thinking of. Does everything happen for a reason on purpose from a higher designed plan or doesn't it? The whole presumption of something "supposed" to have happened. If things are supposed to happen in certain ways then that means there is fate and destiny. But if there is fate and destiny then doesn't everything that happens happen because it was "supposed" to? What forces in play make it that something is "supposed" to happen? If there is a "time stream" how can it be altered? By what?

I've been struggling so much with this question in my own life. I don't know if all the seemingly bad things and failures were "supposed" to happen or not. But I can't shake the feeling that because of particular opportunities that came into my life at particular times did, that "they" were "supposed" to happen and didn't because of my self-destruction and being too asleep at the wheel to realize the extreme life-altering effect my seemingly small and innocent actions and decisions at the time would cause. Not knowing the significance of those choices at the time. Yet, then again, what forces pushed or pulled me or compelled me to hold back in the first place. Is it really all free will or some other mysterious force that influences our thoughts and desires and actions to pull us in certain directions that we wouldn't consciously choose as our destination, but is good for a higher purpose? That purpose might not even be for our own benefit but for the benefit of something or someone else or lots of people in the end. I know that if I had made the right decisions and things instead went how I dream they would have and were "supposed" to that I would be a lot more personally satisfied and benefited from those experiences and outcomes. Yet, on the other hand some of the positive things that have happened in other people's lives and their paths that probably wouldn't of crossed ours if I had made the best decisions and didn't fail out of depression and self-destruction, wouldn't of happened the way they did if I succeeded. Everything would of been different. It would of not just been altering my own path but everyone's path around me and a ripple effect of people I'll never even meet. Who knows. It could of also had a far greater positive effect on the path of those around me if I had made the better decisions. It's very very hard to get over the regret though and fantasizing what events should of happened if I took the other sliding door.

With the ripple butterfly effect, how can we judge anything as good or bad. How do we know the end result or the bigger picture?

If Gore became president would he of had a greater effect then with his movie and combination of high gas prices and everything to energize a new movement of green consciousness? If he was "supposed" to be president does that mean the millions of people that were directly influenced and effected in their own lives, and died in the war or elsewhere because of Bush were not "supposed" to die? Or whatever? Doesn't everyone have their own unique destinies or is it all just one big collective destiny and one one really matters individually? It's very very weird isn't it.

[Bliss Sage]

Kismet: I can really relate to your dilemma and I have always tried to understand this very issue, especially recently. It seems to be a question that never gets answered and always provides so much food for thought.

Originally Posted by kismet

So when someone is able to "predict" something it is because there is no "free will" involved in that outcome?

This is something I have arrived at a better understanding of, however. Being able to predict something is completely different from controlling it or having it be controlled or predetermined as "supposed" to happen. If there is an entity that exists somewhere that is omniscient, or if people here and there around the world get a glimpse into something that will happen in the future, that does not mean that there is no free will. What it means is that the predictor has knowledge of the choices that will be made within the free wills involved in the incident. Omniscience and free will can absolutely co-exist. Omniscience just means "knowing" and it's not indicative of something that was "supposed" to happen and it certainly does not mean a controlling of the choices made in any particular situation. Predictions are therefore not some kind of proof or indicator that there is no free will.