Third parties generally serve only to take votes from one of the main parties. Third parties generally serve only to take votes from one of the main parties. If the third party has a candidate promising similar things to the Rep. candidate, the Democrats are more likely to win simply because their votes are not being siphoned off. Think of it this way: if a school class were to vote on favorite colors and there were only blue and red to choose from, it would probably be mostly equal. But if the same class were to vote for blue, teal, and red, I would be willing to bet that red would win just because its votes weren't being split like the blue votes were. Teal is the third party. It won't ever win on its own, but it can be influential in that it can help the opposite party win.
Answer:
listen to and compromise with others
Explanation:
<u>Just as any kind of conflict, when group conflict occurs it is vital for all parties to be willing to fully listen to the other side and make a compromise, rather than insist on their ideas and belief. </u>
Groups consist of many people which opens more opportunities for the conflict, and more chances for it to be solved unethically, with one person or one group using the power to solve it in their gain.
<u>That is why everyone's opinions and thoughts must be taken into consideration, and no power performance should be displayed in other to make the decision that is ethically right for all. </u>
Answer:
if you if em yum am real this is to inform do it so we is
Explanation:
so us all is well it's so us so is so so
Technology because it's the advancement of their practices.
Answer: A. The statute burdens foreign commerce
Explanation:
The options are:
A. The statute burdens foreign commerce.
B. The statute violates equal protection guarantees because it is not rational to prohibit the sale of foreign beef but not foreign leather.
C. The statute substantially interferes with the vendor's right to earn a living under the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
D. The statute constitutes a taking without due process of law.
From the question, we are informed that a cattle-producing state adopted a statute that requires any food service business operating in the state to serve beef raised in the United States and that a licensed hot dog vendor who worked at a football field within the state and who had been buying hot dogs made with foreign beef for the past several years calculated that switching to an all-beef hot dog made from United States beef would reduce his profits by 10%.
The vendor then hired an attorney to challenge the statute and the attorney discovered during research into the case that most of the footballs used at the football field at which the vendor worked were made of foreign leather.
Based on the above scenario, it should be noted that it is the Congress that has power to regulate foreign commerce. Hence, in this scenario, the state adopting a legislation that requires the private vendors to favor the breed served in the United States over the foreign products is outside its powers scope. Only the congress can make such decision.
