Okay then
Explanation: who you talking to?
They felt that Latin American ports were of greater strategic value than Pacific ports.
The stamp act was the first interal tax levied directly american colonist by the british goverement. The tea act was that the colonist had never accepted the constitionability of the duty of tea, and the tea act rekindled their opposition to it.
<span>I
think that the positives of partisanship is that the incumbent political leader
will have the (1) unwavering support from his cohorts with regards to the
projects, programs or laws that he/she will be implementing (2) their
aspirations and objectives are aligned which helps in catalyzing in the changes
that they may want to implement in the government or administration and (3) its
identity can endure simply because it is strengthened by affiliating itself to
gender, ethnic, religious and racial groups thus promoting a connection to a
party which eventually generates political stability and diminish political
influence by independents or nonpartisans. On the downside, partisanship may
(1) promote divisiveness especially if its advocacies are met with great
opposition by the non-cohorts and (2) there will be bias especially if
arguments are thrown against them which leads to the scrutiny of the opposing
views at a greater degree just to refute the said argument.</span>
Because of imperialism, countries now had access to colonies. When the war started, they were able to equip their colonies to fight for their side. This led to higher tensions and increased involvement in the war.
