<span>Voting is the most important political act for an American citizen. This is the case because it is the one act that has direct consequences for the leadership of the country. While the other options do provide a means to make one's voice heard, the leaders can easily choose to ignore them. However, because votes are the thing that puts leaders in office and removes them, leaders are directly impacted and more likely to listen to your concerns.</span>
I think that it could be argued whether or not he was "bad" but he definitely wasn't the best.
The biggest arguments for John Adams as a bad president:
1) He acted too much on his own beliefs and didn't go along with any party. Didn't go against Washington's wishes and enter war against France, which a lot of people disagreed with.
2) The Alien Acts made it easier to deport foreigners, and made it more difficult for immigrants to vote. The sedition acts were basically a form of censorship that prevented people from saying negative things about the government.
3) He was not as religious as many other politicians at the time, and is famous for saying that the United States is not a Christian country.
Basically, he did things based on his own beliefs and didn't go along with any one party. This caused both parties to hate him, and some could say that it led to the death of the Federalist party since they were without any real leader during this time.
Answer:
he believed it was about preserving the Union
One major difference between Noah’s and Rector’s historical interpretation of the War on Poverty is Noah described poverty as a societal failure rather than personal moral failings.
Explanation:
In the interpretation of the war on poverty Noah and Rector does not possess same thinking. As Noah thought that poverty is a social curse in which one has nothing to do. War is one of the cause of financial crisis that led to poverty in the society. People used to lose their property, money everything in the war.
On the other side Rector do not think that poverty is a social curse. He thought that poverty is caused to anyone due to the failings of one's personal moral values. He thought poverty can be replenished if anyone's want. It has no power to be heavy on one's life.
Answer:
Kings and lords would view this statement as a very aggressive one against their kingdoms if they were not contextualized.
Explanation:
The reasons behind this answer are that in the first place if the kings and lords who heard this statement didn't have the religious context to understand it, they would feel assaulted or threatened because they would take it literally instead of metaphorical. That is the reason why we have to contextualize our public before we tell share our ideas with them.
