Man it depends on what the topic is but if i were to take a wild guess , A or D
Answer:
Leadership
Explanation:
Federalism in the United States, is referred to as the doctrine of shared sovereignty, it is the constitutional division of power between U.S. state governments and the federal government of the United States. While
Informal rules are unwritten, tacit rules that define acceptable roles and activities for varying individuals based on social norms, culture and historical factor.
Informal rules had an impact on American federalism in the area of political Leadership.
Leadership is act of motivating a people with common goal and mindsets and vision.
It is a norm to have leaders who guide the interest of the people, enforce the will of a state and execute projects for the common good of all. They ensure the social security of a people.
Leader, based on tradition ensures that taxes are payed to the the government and defaulters are brought to book. So this informal rule played a significant role in federalism in the United states
Those students used the central route to persuasion, and were influenced by the quality of the persuasive argument.
<h3>What is a persuasive argument?</h3>
This is the type of argument that the person arguing engages in because they want to get the other party to see their point of view.
The goal is to ensure that the person you are talking to buys your idea and works with it. The way people go about this argument is through the use of logic and reasoning.
The goal is to try to be able to get the other person to adopt your pattern of reasoning and also take action based on that.
This can be referred to as a call to action by appealing to the emotions and the reasoning of your audience.
Read more on persuasive argument here
brainly.com/question/1790640
#SPJ1
The answer is less.
Poor people barely if not have no means to sustain themselves. Many have no money for food, shelter or
clothing. They forced to live on the streets and take what they can. Though there government and non-government
units who help the poor, many still have difficulty to survive.
Answer:
No. The Romans did not commit genocide against the Gauls
Explanation:
Julius Ceaser's Gallic Wars occurred from 58 to 51 B.C. Gaul was invaded by the Romans mainly for money. Ceaser needed to pay off his debts and also wanted to keep making a name for himself, thus invading Gaul was the answer. He didn't care about the people who lived there nor did he ever discuss their culture, nationality, or race as being a reason for invading. If we look at the definition of genocide it's "the deliberate or systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group." Again, Ceaser never listed any of those as being a reason for invasion; all he needed was victories.
