That is because these were people who usually had some wealth and were successful. It was done to prevent slaves or migrants or women or anyone similar from attaining political power. It was a way of keeping the status quo as it was and make the old land owners some sort of a new political elite.
<span>Madison claimed that private rights and public good would be best protected in a single large republic rather than a mélange of small republics. Do I agree? Yes, absolutely, I agree. There's no strength in division; it is pretty obvious that in unity is strength. Just think for a seconds what will become of the United States if there are 52 countries in North America? India would be more developed had Pakistan and Bangladesh not broken off from India. Yes, public good should be protected in a large republic rather than a string of small republics.</span>
They would have told them that we are not that well of a nation and when you send off those vibes they will see you as an easy target and so they will try to atack
Martin Luther mark me brainliest please
It could be argued that public policy is "<span>b. the goals and actions taken by the government," since this best describes actions that are meant to affect the social and economic trajectory of the United States. </span>