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
masya89 [10]
3 years ago
15

Many historians consider the James K. Polk presidency to be considerably aggressive and/or controversial. How do you rate the pr

esidency of James Polk? Great? Good? Average? Poor? Awful? To what extent did his single term in office help or hinder the development of the United States? What is the basis of your conclusion?
History
1 answer:
Maurinko [17]3 years ago
5 0

James K Polk is one of the historical figures that is really hard to judge by modern standards.

He was a forceful man with strongly held beliefs. He was the last in the line of "Jacksonian Presidents" with all of the baggage that came along with that.

Ultimately, he was a strong war time President. His single term in office led to the short lived Presidency of Zachary Taylor, who was significantly less informed and forceful than Polk. After Polk, the issue of slavery really came to the forefront. Polk was either responsible for delaying the prominence of this issue or just got lucky. It is likely that history would look much differently if Polk had a second term and continued his aggressive posture towards America's future.

I'd say he was a good President, for his time, who strongly acted on the economy and in regards to Mexico but whose record looks abysmal by modern standards and values.



You might be interested in
Please help me Due 12:00 Pm please 4
guajiro [1.7K]

Answer:

B: The Congress repealed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution to limit presidential war powers.

5 0
3 years ago
Think about what you know of the situation in Europe in the early 1900s.
Maksim231197 [3]

Answer: A, B, & D

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Do you agree or disagree with Jacob Riis? Can democracy survive in the slums? i put 30 of points on this please answer quickly.
jok3333 [9.3K]

Answer:

I don't think that democracy can survive in the slums. I think so because people in the slums are always treated badly for the things they don't have and they have to turn to illegal means to survive. It's do or die in the slums and Democracy died in a losing battle.

Explanation:

8 0
2 years ago
Which of these powers does the Constitution deny the federal government?
miv72 [106K]
Building roads and structures the citizens don’t want because the states/cities do that
5 0
3 years ago
The Southern colonies’ rich soil and warm climate made them good for growing crops. As a result, the Southern economy was almost
mihalych1998 [28]
Need to kno this too
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Who was the decision makers Experience SCARCITY
    9·1 answer
  • Which of the following was not part of the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932? It made yellow dog contracts unenforceable. It ended th
    10·1 answer
  • WILL MARK BRAINLIEST!! HELP ASAP!!!!!!!!
    13·1 answer
  • In what ways does ww2 serve as a transition from the previous era or to the following era?
    15·1 answer
  • 20 Points! PLS HELP!
    15·2 answers
  • DO NOT ANSWER IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO IT FOR THE POINTS AND IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO HELP ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BUT PLEASE HELP.
    5·1 answer
  • Plz help asap
    11·2 answers
  • During the 1930s, the "New Deal" showed that the United States government was willing to A) strictly follow the practices of lai
    11·1 answer
  • Did Sam houston go to jail in mexico?
    14·1 answer
  • American citizens are guaranteed the rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!