there will always be many examples that will say almost the exact opposite when you are only looking at one planet placement in a sign... you really do need to factor in the whole chart which is frustrating in so far as you want to get an the exact meaning of planets in signs...
take a look at mitt romneys chart with venus in aq conjunct midheaven and in opposition to saturn/pluto... maybe it will offer some further insights in regard to his relationship pattern, or quest for a seat in the white house - take yer pick...
Prediction: Nomination but no victory for Mitt Romney: Saturn and Pluto are malefics (negative energy) so it signifies loss in electoral campaigns. I say personal birth star charts and daily horoscopes with a Saturn-Pluto conjunction (heightened based on signs and natal houses) are bad news.
Planets in Scorpio, the sign associated with the most negativity, has a huge impact on people and places throughout history in astrology. Not only when Mars is in Scorpio, when the outer planets were in Scorpio and double or triple that whenever Mercury and Venus appears in Scorpio.
When the outer planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune in Scorpio then into Sagittarius and Capricorn in a given time period had an impact on political systems, social mores and economic health (i.e. the Oct. 1987 Wall Street crash) of the world during the late 1980s-1990s-early 2000s.
The planet Pluto rules Scorpio, so does Mars and the personal impact of some marriages and relationships worsened when Mercury or Venus was in the sign. The Mars-Pluto (plus Saturn) presence or any triplicity planetary conjunction in Scorpio could mean a complication of societies perception of traditional gender roles in romance and marriage, back in the late 1980s/early 1990s when Pluto was lodged in Scorpio.