Answer:By threatening a veto, the President can persuade legislators to alter the content of the bill to be more acceptable to the President. Congress can override a veto by passing the act by a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate. (Usually an act is passed with a simple majority.)
Explanation:
Answer:
B. We all seem to be in basic agreement, so there's no sense in continuing our discussion of this issue."
Explanation:
In a group think, there are some portion of the group members who decided not to challenge the view or principles that held by the group for the sake of not disturbing the harmony in the group.
The statement above is most likely made in order to shut down any chance for members who have opposing views to speak up their opinion so they decided to disregard it rather than acknowledging the difference
Presidents typically depend on their fellow partisans to get their policy proposals enacted in congress.
A partisan is a devoted soldier or member of a political party. The phrase describes those who fervently adhere to the policies of their party and are unwilling to reach a political compromise. A political partisan should not be confused with a partisan in the armed forces. Over the past 60 years, the meaning of the phrase has undergone a significant alteration in the United States. Prior to the American National Election Study, which began in 1952 and is discussed in Angus Campbell et albook .'s The American Voter, it was common practice to infer someone's partisan preferences from their voting record. Since that time, the term "partisan" has evolved to describe a person who has a psychological affinity for one of the two main parties.
Learn more about partisans here:
brainly.com/question/21902069
#SPJ4
Answer:
A dissenting opinion can be important because they show how the Supreme Court has reached their opinion(s).
Explanation:
Dissents provide an explanation on the thought processes of the justices who did not agree with the majority opinion and why they did not agree- also providing insight to the majority/concurring opinions of the other justices.
