1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Pie
3 years ago
8

While the united states has had several minor parties, only the two major parties have much of a chance to win elections. what f

eatures of the u.s. political system contribute to the dominance of two parties?
History
1 answer:
lara31 [8.8K]3 years ago
5 0
Single member districts and a winner-take-all voting system. Hope this helps!
You might be interested in
How and why did the colonists sense of a collective british identity change?
murzikaleks [220]
<span>It was by their independence in 1776 and they had a policy of mercantilism and a high degree of autonomy and they resisted to the demands of London for a greater control. The Seven Years War left the three European kingdoms (Britain, France, and Spain) in bankruptcy and thanks to the thought developed in the century of the lights would provoke in them a feeling of independence. Each of these colonies developed its own system of government, and, they voted in favor of its local government. In this way, they had a collective change of identity.</span>
8 0
3 years ago
Which ideal is fundamental principle of articles of confederation?
Marysya12 [62]
D. freedom of speech for individuals and lawmakers

6 0
3 years ago
When a state seeks to acquire the neighboring territory that is home to ethnically similar people and territory on the other sid
kiruha [24]

Irredentism


"Irredentism is any political or popular movement that seeks to claim/reclaim and occupy a land that the movement's members consider to be a "lost" territory from their nation's past. Wikipedia"

7 0
3 years ago
The Constitution gives the federal goverment many important duties: making laws, raising money and deciding how to
Mama L [17]

Answer:

National defense is the priority job of the national government.

National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government. Most of the powers granted to Congress are permissive in nature. Congress is given certain authorities but not required by the Constitution to exercise them. For example, Article One, Section Eight gives Congress power to pass a bankruptcy code, but Congress actually did not enact bankruptcy laws until well into the 19th century.

But the Constitution does require the federal government to protect the nation. Article Four, Section Four states that the “United States shall guarantee to every State a republican form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion.” In other words, even if the federal government chose to exercise no other power, it must, under the Constitution, provide for the common defense.

National defense is exclusively the function of the national government. Under our Constitution, the states are generally sovereign, which means that the legitimate functions of government not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved to the states. But Article One, Section 10 does specifically prohibit the states, except with the consent of Congress, from keeping troops or warships in time of peace or engaging in war, the only exception being that states may act on their own if actually invaded. (This was necessary because, when the Constitution was written, primitive forms of communication and transportation meant that it could take weeks before Washington was even notified of an invasion.)

The great irony of our time is that the bigger the federal government has become, the less well it has performed its priority function of providing for the national defense. For example, Congress spent $787 billion in the “stimulus” bill last year, yet not a dime of it was spent on military procurement or modernization—despite the fact that America is in greater danger today than it has been at any time since Communism was threatening Europe in the late 1940s.

The Heritage Foundation has written extensively on the risks facing America and the state of our defenses. Here is a brief summary of the salient facts.

America has no strategy for victory in the war on terrorism—we’re not even calling it a war anymore—and the momentum has shifted to the terrorists. The outcome in Afghanistan is in doubt. If the terrorists succeed there, they can reconstitute their safe havens, plan further attacks on the United States, and threaten to gain control of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

The Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, a bipartisan commission with the status of the 9/11 Commission, found unanimously that the terrorists would “more likely than not” develop and use a weapon of mass destruction against a Western city by 2013. The Director of National Intelligence publicly agreed with that assessment.

The international regime for controlling nuclear weapons is broken. Pakistan has a substantial and growing nuclear arsenal. Its intelligence organization has been penetrated by the Islamists. Both North Korea and Iran are steadily increasing the range, payload, and accuracy of their ballistic missiles. No one seriously believes that the Iranians will voluntarily stop their nuclear program or that the West (except perhaps the Israelis) will use force to stop them.

According to our Pacific commander, China is increasing its military strength far more quickly than our intelligence predicted. The Chinese have already acquired an arsenal of advanced fighters and missiles that threatens to deny the American Navy access to the Taiwan Strait. They are building as many as five submarines per year and have established a modern submarine base on the island of Hainan. They have announced plans to build a variety of the ships necessary to field a blue water capability.  

The American military is significantly weaker than it was at the end of the Cold War.  Most of our tankers are equally as old; they will not be replaced, if at all, until the 2030s. The Department of Defense wants to close our most modern cargo aircraft production line and will close our most sophisticated fighter line. The missile defense budget has been cut, and according to most reports, the Obama Administration will cut modernization budgets even further.

As important as it is for the federal government to restrain itself from interfering where it does not belong, it is equally important that the government perform its constitutionally mandated function of providing for the national defense.

America’s global influence is being checked and rolled back, and even the homeland is no longer safe from attack.

The situation can still be recovered, but only if our leaders understand their duty, regain their confidence, and reenergize the defense of freedom here and abroad.

7 0
3 years ago
How did Britain and France respond when Hitler invaded Austria in 1938
expeople1 [14]

Answer: i hope this help this is all i answer yo will see your answer nest to the check mark

Explanation:      

A B

What do we call it when Hitler began to build up his forces in 1935? re-armament

What is conscription? calling up men into the army

How did Britain and France react to rearmament? They did nothing

Where did Hitler invade on March 7, 1936, which broke the Treaty of Versailles? The Rhineland

How did Britain and France respond to Germany's invasion of the Rhineland? They did nothing

Why did German Generals advise not entering the Rhineland? It might engage France in a war

How did Britain and France respond to the German invasion of Austria in 1938? They did nothing.

What had the treaty of Versailles said about Anschluss? The treaty of Versailles said Anschluss, the union of Germany and Austria, was forbidden.

Where is the Sudentenland? It is part of Czechoslovakia.

Why did Hitler say he invaded the Sudetenland? He wanted to protect the rights of Sudeten's German minority

How did Britain and France respond to Hitler's invasion of the Sudetenland? At Munich, on Sept. 29, 1938, they gave in to Hitler.

What finally made the British people realize the only way to stop Hitler was a war? When Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia and took the rest of it over.

what was Great Britain and France's reaction to the German takeover of Czechoslovakia? They announced they would defend the integrity of Poland.

This means giving into a bully appeasement

What have historians said the results of appeasement have been. let Hitler grow stronger, gave Britain time to rearm, humilitated Britain, abandoned millions of people to the Nazis, caused the war by encouraging Hitler to think he could do anything, was a fine attempt to prevent teh deaths of millions of people in a war.

What were the five most important reasons that Britain appeased Hitler? Some British approved of Hitler's policies, The British people hoped that a strong Germany would stop the growth of Communist Russsia, Many people felt that events in Europe wer not Britain's business, Many British wanted peace, many British people agreed with Hitler that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair.

This was the term for the Union of Germany and Austria. Anschluss

Who called the Munich conference the "Peace in our time"? Neville Chamberlain

Why would Russia sign the Nazi-Soviet Pact even though they did not like Hitler and not join with Britain instead? Stalin was afraid if he supported Britain and Germany did invade Poland, Britain would back down like they had so many times before and Russia would be fighting a war in Poland on Britain's behalf. On the other hand, Hitler was promising Stalin peace and half of Poland.

Which British leader opposed the policy of appeasement? Winston Churchill

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What country gave weapons to Russia in ww2
    5·1 answer
  • Why was the wilmot proviso divisive to congress ?
    10·1 answer
  • I was born to freed slaves during the civil war. i became a schoolteacher and worked for economic success and independence of af
    12·2 answers
  • Which best describes the conflict between Odysseus and Antinous? A. Antinous disobeys Odysseus's order not to slay the cattle of
    7·1 answer
  • How can illusions be a reason to why we can’t believe everything we see
    12·1 answer
  • HELP PLEASE
    9·1 answer
  • Which of the following is a true statement about the population of the United States between 2000 and 2010?
    8·1 answer
  • Please answer this (will give brainliest, 5 stars)
    9·2 answers
  • Meriwether Lewis and William Clark are MOST associated with which of these?
    12·2 answers
  • Which is an example of a country that is overly dependent on another country for critical goods and services? a country that imp
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!