Answer:
freedom of speech, press, assembly, petitioning and religion
Explanation:
For example a group of protestors are protesting a new law which endangers a local animal habitat with many animals living in it. They can protest this law under the 1st amendment which ensures freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.
Answer:
In America, the presidential election system is not through the direct vote of the citizenry, but through the indirect election carried out by the Electoral College. Thus, each voting citizen gives his cast to a specific candidate, but said will must be endorsed by the electors of his state in the Electoral College.
In this regard, each state has the number of voters equal to the number of congressmen it has in the federal Congress. Thus, for example, states like Montana or Alaska have 3 electors (since they have 2 senators and 1 representative), while California has 55.
The problem is that, to determine the electoral votes of each candidate, it has been established that whoever wins the popular votes in the state takes all the votes of the electors of that state (except in the case of Maine and Nebraska). For this reason, it may happen that a candidate in California defeats his opponent 50.1% to 49.9%, in what would be almost a technical tie, but takes 100% of the electoral votes. Thus, the right of citizens to the election of their representatives is violated, and a candidate who has not obtained the majority of the popular vote (as happened in 2016 with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton) could win in the Electoral College.
Thus, many candidates adopt the strategy of campaigning and giving all their effort in the states with the largest number of voters such as California, Texas, Florida or New York, leaving aside other states considered less important.
Answer:
Yes and no.. Yes some people soely relhy on social security when they could really take care of themselves. but some are physically unable to do for themselves so they have to rely on Social security
Explanation:
Adam Smith was the B) author of "The Wealth of Nations" and could be considered the father of modern economics, but more accurately should be considered the father of "modern capitalism."
