Answer:
Progressives usually aim for equality and social justice, thus, they should focus on policies that advance these goals.
Explanation:
Some of these policies could be: universal health care coverage, whether under a public system, or a mixed private/public system.
More funds for education, both in elementary, secondary, and tertiary education, making emphasis on those students who are talented but do not have enough economic resources to pay tuition.
Antoher policy could be aim at the treatment of minorities, who often bear the brunt of systemic inequalities.
There are a few things that can impact this. They incorporate religious conventions, companions, the media, and their family will impact their political socialization and convictions. Political socialization is a deeply rooted handle by which individuals shape their thoughts regarding governmental issues and secure political esteems. The family, instructive framework, peer gatherings, and the broad communications all assume a part.
Answer:
The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 Presidential Election should go down in history as one of the court's most ill-conceived judgments. In issuing its poorly-reasoned ruling in Bush v. Gore, the court majority unnecessarily exposed itself to charges of partisanship and risked undermining the court's stature as an independent, impartial arbiter of the law. Although the court majority correctly identified constitutional problems in the specific recount proceedings ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, the decision to end all recount attempts did immeasurable damage to the equal protection rights the court claimed to be guarding, since it favored a convenient and timely tabulation of ballots over an accurate recording of the vote. In the controversy that followed this decision, some critics of the majority decision argued that the court had no business taking on Bush v. Gore in the first place, that it should have remained solely within the Florida courts (Ginsburg, J. [Dissent] Bush v. Gore [2000]). This paper will argue that the court was correct to intervene but that umm the resulting decision was flawed and inconsistent, with potentially serious, adverse implications for the Federal judiciary if the court continues to issue rulings in this way.
Explanation:
President Jackson was strongly against the Second Bank of the US, because of that he vetoed it.
He vetoed it because he saw the Bank as a bank only for the privileged ones, as the President saw himself as a spokesman for the common people against the elite.
The President saw this as a way to increase his popularity among his voters.
