An argument to separate national elections from local elections is that <u>unqualified candidates can be elected to local office simply because they are the same party as a popular presidential candidate</u>
Explanation:
People usually vote for the same party regardless, but people can get extra focused on voting democrat or republican in national elections that they forget that a local candidate might not be qualified for the position. By having the elections separate, it allows people to focus on the local needs more than if the local and national elections were held together.
The correct answer is A) unqualified candidates can be elected to local office simply because they are the same party as a popular presidential candidate.
An argument to separate national elections from local elections is "unqualified candidates can be elected to local office simply because they are the same party as a popular presidential candidate."
So it is important to separate both in order for the citizens to really know the kind of candidate they need to vote for in a local election. This way, electors have the time to learn more about the candidate background, its degrees in college, its experience in politics or business, so voters can make the right choice
The most immediate consequence of colonisation was a wave of epidemic diseases including smallpox, measles and influenza, which spread ahead of the frontier and annihilated many First Nations communities.
