Well, I like the Astros. But I do not have apparel or talk about the fact I like the Astros. I may go to a game and watch, but that would be all other than hoping the team wins if they are in fact good AND good sports.
Answer:
The statement 'A 1993 study showed that teachers tend to favor males over females, thereby creating an inequality in mixed-gender schools' provides the best supporting evidence for the claim.
Explanation:
Statement D best supports the claims because it provides evidence based on researches and data. A hypothesis statement or claim is always considered to be true when it is supported by sufficient researches and statistical data. Statement D is using research and data from a 1993 study to claim its point. Hence, it is the best statement that supports the claims.
The other options do not provide any research or data study to support their claim hence, other options are wrong.
It can be inferred that the narrator means that they had no other option but to make to for obey their "harsh mistress".
<h3>Who is a narrator?</h3>
A narrator is a person via whose perspective a story is being told. Types of narrators are:
- First-Person Narrative
- Second-Person Narrative
- Third-Person Narrative
- Omniscient Third-Person Narrator.
From the above text, it can be concluded or inferred that the narrator and others with him were in a place that was difficult as far as the mistress was concerned but had not option but to endure it.
Learn more about narrator:
brainly.com/question/14305951
#SPJ1
McCarthyism is nothing more than a witch hunt. A lot of finger pointing and not a lot of proof. Both parties (Democrat & Republican) in the United States use this in todays world. Ill give examples of both and follow up with how it can be beneficial to each party.
Democrats: Accuse other politicians of being "racist" or "bigoted" just from political ideas and from certain members of the base. While it is not fact or true that Republicans are by policy racist, it is a word that is hated by people and has a negative connotation to it, forcing some to keep distance from said person
Republicans: Accuse other politicians of being "muslin lovers" or "muslins" themselves. We saw this for the entire Obama presidency. Congress and some Republican supporters would use the word "muslin" to describe the president in order to give a negative connotation towards Obama. This has some strong effectiveness due to the recent events (September 11th, 2001).
Both parties are trying to stick a negative idea/precedent/description about the opposition in order to sway votes. This tactic is very effective because not only will you sway votes, theres little repercussion in doing so because the people who disagree with you are not going to be swayed, but that voter in the middle who cares about one issue over the other (in this case racism over fear of muslims or vice versa fear of muslims over racism).
Either someone is intelligent enough to know the rhetoric between the two parties and votes by policy (unaffected / no positive or negative response), they don't care about either issue (unaffected / no positive or negative response), or someone is strongly in favor of one or the other (strong positive or negative response).
While there are some attempts that have been made and can be made that would be so egregious that most people have a negative response, but that rarely happens and would be deemed political suicide.
Hope this helps.
