Answer:
1. Invalid and weak
2. Invalid and strong.
Explanation:
The first argument does not present statements that support and justify it and for that reason, we can consider it a weak argument. In addition, the conclusion of the argument is not consistent with its premise, presenting a fallacy and causing wrong reasoning, which shows that the argument is invalid.
Similarly, the second argument has a conclusion that contradicts the information shown above, which invalidates the argument. However, the argument presents additional information that can support and justify it, for this reason, we can consider it a strong argument.
Answer: Labeling each answer in order as A, B, C and D, the correct one is D, senators are elected direclty by each state´s voters.
Explanation: The 17th Amendment replaced the constitution's Article 1 section 3, clauses 1 and 2, which establish that each senator must be elected by each state´s legislature.
I believe it would be c)landed
Answer:
Reasons for irrational behaviour : Political brand name establishment in favour of candidate, enhancing brand loyalty towards.
More knowledgable public : Would value candidate working on real development, rather than mere brand name.
Explanation:
Political elections are determined by the public's impressions of the candidates rather than the candidates' views on the issues.
Reason(s) of such irrational voting behaviour could be : The candidate having established a personal brand image of himself/ herself, specially in a particular community group. This makes the people of the community being 'brand loyal' towards their candidate, irrespective of his or her ideologies. It is also possible to make that political personality (candidate) an important part of 'national image' or 'community leader image', which reinforce support for the candidate, irrespective of person perception and attitudes.
If public were more knowledgeable about factors that affect person perception and attitudes : The political support would not be based on lineaged political brand names. It would rather be earned on the basis of candidate's performance for socio - economic, political upliftment. This would give power in the hands of deserving politicians & create a message that 'real work' & not just 'name' is needed to gain political success
a. whatever type of team you choose, you know that less diversity will bring you ideas.
