|
|
Post by randomkiwibirds on Nov 17, 2014 1:06:51 GMT
Whoa so if Julia is considering running for office-and she does-could this be the said election for her campaign?
|
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 17, 2014 1:08:52 GMT
Whoa so if Julia is considering running for office-and she does-could this be the said election for her campaign? I wonder if Brackenreid will have any pompous carriage advice for her. Since he has done the election thing before himself. |
|
|
|
Post by randomkiwibirds on Nov 17, 2014 1:15:55 GMT
Whoa so if Julia is considering running for office-and she does-could this be the said election for her campaign? I wonder if Brackenreid will have any pompous carriage advice for her. Since he has done the election thing before himself. That would be priceless. I think it would be highly unlikely-that is if we are talking about Julia here-that she would actally get elected. Her opposition would have a field day with her criminal record and the fact that *gasps* is a woman! -- I just did a tiddle bit of research & according to Wikipeida 1902 – Margaret Haile runs as a candidate of the Canadian Socialist League in Toronto North for the Ontario provincial election, becoming the first woman ever to stand in a provincial election. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Canadian_politics) |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 17, 2014 1:28:00 GMT
I just did a tiddle bit of research & according to Wikipeida 1902 – Margaret Haile runs as a candidate of the Canadian Socialist League in Toronto North for the Ontario provincial election, becoming the first woman ever to stand in a provincial election. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Canadian_politics) Great find!!! I think this means that Julia considers running for office, but at some point the Fab Four decide to back Margaret Haile instead. As the Wikipedia entry says, she would not have been able to sit in the Legislature even if she won, though - it was to make the point: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_HaileThe U.S. had done something similar with running women for President even though women didn't have the vote - symbolic gesture. By the way, the general strategy in the U.S. was for women to get the right to vote in the States - then when all the States had suffrage, a Federal amendment could be passed. This was pretty sickening in a way, because it meant that the National organization had to look the other way on a lot of issues in order to please particular States: for instance some Southern States wanted to grant the vote to white women only. I'm curious as to whether Canadian women finally buckled under the same way - leaving different provinces to pass suffrage laws before doing anything at the National level. By the way the MAJOR impetus in the US was racist. After the Civil War, white women saw former black male slaves had more political rights than they did! And when the U.S. acquired colonies after the Spanish-American war, there was the threat of male SAVAGES getting the vote! I wrote elsewhere that after the 1890s the suffrage argument took the tact of saying outright that white women's votes were needed to preserve white supremacy in the U.S. Anything like that going on in Canada? |
|
|
|
Post by randomkiwibirds on Nov 17, 2014 1:46:11 GMT
I just did a tiddle bit of research & according to Wikipeida 1902 – Margaret Haile runs as a candidate of the Canadian Socialist League in Toronto North for the Ontario provincial election, becoming the first woman ever to stand in a provincial election. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Canadian_politics) Great find!!! I think this means that Julia considers running for office, but at some point the Fab Four decide to back Margaret Haile instead. As the Wikipedia entry says, she would not have been able to sit in the Legislature even if she won, though - it was to make the point: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_HaileThe U.S. had done something similar with running women for President even though women didn't have the vote - symbolic gesture. By the way, the general strategy in the U.S. was for women to get the right to vote in the States - then when all the States had suffrage, a Federal amendment could be passed. This was pretty sickening in a way, because it meant that the National organization had to look the other way on a lot of issues in order to please particular States: for instance some Southern States wanted to grant the vote to white women only. I'm curious as to whether Canadian women finally buckled under the same way - leaving different provinces to pass suffrage laws before doing anything at the National level. By the way the MAJOR impetus in the US was racist. After the Civil War, white women saw former black male slaves had more political rights than they did! And when the U.S. acquired colonies after the Spanish-American war, there was the threat of male SAVAGES getting the vote! I wrote elsewhere that after the 1890s the suffrage argument took the tact of saying outright that white women's votes were needed to preserve white supremacy in the U.S. Anything like that going on in Canada? It appears so  "Women's political status without the vote was promoted by the National Council of Women of Canada from 1894 to 1918. It promoted a vision of "transcendent citizenship" for women. The ballot was not needed, for citizenship was to be exercised through personal influence and moral suasion, through the election of men with strong moral character, and through raising public-spirited sons. The National Council position was integrated into its nation-building program that sought to uphold Canada as a White settler nation. While the women's suffrage movement was important for extending the political rights of White women, it was also authorized through race-based arguments that linked White women's enfranchisement to the need to protect the nation from "racial degeneration."" ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage#The_Americas ) |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 17, 2014 1:54:18 GMT
It appears so "Women's political status without the vote was promoted by the National Council of Women of Canada from 1894 to 1918. It promoted a vision of "transcendent citizenship" for women. The ballot was not needed, for citizenship was to be exercised through personal influence and moral suasion, through the election of men with strong moral character, and through raising public-spirited sons. The National Council position was integrated into its nation-building program that sought to uphold Canada as a White settler nation. While the women's suffrage movement was important for extending the political rights of White women, it was also authorized through race-based arguments that linked White women's enfranchisement to the need to protect the nation from "racial degeneration."" ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage#The_Americas ) Hmm, while the National Council of Women was all about preserving White Supremacy, it seems like they were wishy washy about whether they were supporting efforts to win the ballot. So it's possible the Fab Four could take issue with whether they even want to be affiliated with the National Council if the National Council prefers that women practice "moral suasion" to elect men. At the minute the Fab Four group is all white highly educated women: some issues may come up as they recruit new members. In Canada, the issue might be Native women more than black women or immigrants from non-WASPy nations though. |
|
|
|
Post by randomkiwibirds on Nov 26, 2014 5:33:05 GMT
How Margaret Haile swoops in an snatches the election from Julia:
One word. FUNDING
Who's going to fund Julia's campagin. Sure she's got her own money but she's going to want to try and get some backers? So the Canadian Socialist League steps up to the plate their condition: A Socialist Runs.
So they would be quite happy providing funding for Haile's campaign, but not Julia's. A
And that ladies and gentlemen, is how Margaret Haile steals the election from Julia.
|
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 26, 2014 5:48:12 GMT
How Margaret Haile swoops in an snatches the election from Julia: One word. FUNDING Who's going to fund Julia's campagin. Sure she's got her own money but she's going to want to try and get some backers? So the Canadian Socialist League steps up to the plate their condition: A Socialist Runs. So they would be quite happy providing funding for Haile's campaign, but not Julia's. A And that ladies and gentlemen, is how Margaret Haile steals the election from Julia. Or...they refuse to fund a SCANDALOUS DIVORCEE!  Or...Julia looks in her piggy bank and discovers that William spent all the money on the Magical Electrical Castle that he's building for her.  |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Mar 13, 2015 11:45:29 GMT
Per CBC Website: Murdoch Mysteries (HD) (DV) - Series 8 - Eps 17 - Election DayDr. Ogden and the suffragettes face a setback on Election Day, while Murdoch investigates a murder with implications for national security. Guest starring Peter Keleghan www.cbc.ca/programguide/daily/2015/03/23/cbc_television/?t=1426242900448I was wondering when Terrence Meyers was going to make an appearance! |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Mar 13, 2015 16:50:03 GMT
Per CBC Website: Murdoch Mysteries (HD) (DV) - Series 8 - Eps 17 - Election DayDr. Ogden and the suffragettes face a setback on Election Day, while Murdoch investigates a murder with implications for national security. Guest starring Peter Keleghan www.cbc.ca/programguide/daily/2015/03/23/cbc_television/?t=1426242900448I was wondering when Terrence Meyers was going to make an appearance! Woohoo! Finally! |
|
|
|
Post by bookworm1225 on Mar 13, 2015 17:12:17 GMT
Per CBC Website: Murdoch Mysteries (HD) (DV) - Series 8 - Eps 17 - Election DayDr. Ogden and the suffragettes face a setback on Election Day, while Murdoch investigates a murder with implications for national security. Guest starring Peter Keleghan www.cbc.ca/programguide/daily/2015/03/23/cbc_television/?t=1426242900448I was wondering when Terrence Meyers was going to make an appearance! Woohoo! Finally! *insert happy dance here* |
|
|
|
Post by lizmc on Mar 20, 2015 1:40:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lizmc on Mar 20, 2015 17:11:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Mar 20, 2015 17:45:03 GMT
"Oh, William..." LOL!!! ok, that was funny.  |
|
|
|
Post by lizmc on Mar 20, 2015 20:37:37 GMT
"Oh, William..." LOL!!! ok, that was funny. Not to mention, despite being groggy, still managing to croak out "Terrence Meyers!" |
|
Jan 30, 2013 21:44:55 GMT