Yes I think that each side has good things to say about the other side. This is because I think that many people's political viewpoints don't always perfectly align to one party or the other. In reality, life is much more complicated than picking one side. Sure some people might agree with policies from the Democrat's side, but they might see other Republican views to be valid as well. I like to think of it as a buffet of ideas, where people tend to pick and choose which talking points they magnetically snap to. We could have for example a socially liberal person but who supports conservative financial measures; or we could have someone who has very religious conservative morals, but supports liberal monetary policies.
In other words, it's unrealistic to assume people will be purely one party. Those who seem that way tend to be stuck in a bubble where it's like a feedback loop of talking points fed to them. Fox News is one example of this on the conservative side, while MSNBC is an example of this on the liberal side. Those stuck in this bubble would likely not have much nice things to say about the other side, if they have anything nice to say at all. However, I think to some (if not many) people, politics has become very toxic that they simply turn the tv off entirely. By "turn off", I mean literally turn it off or change the channel to something else. These people I'd consider somewhere in the middle in a moderate range. Furthermore, these moderates are likely to have some nice things to say about both sides, but they might have their complaints about both sides as well.
In short, if you pick someone from either extreme, then it's likely they'll have nothing nice to say about the other side. If you pick someone from the middle, then they might have nice things to say about both sides. It all depends who you ask. Also, it depends on how politically active they are.
Answer:
I think the answer is the second choice. Hope it helped!!!!
Explanation:
<u>Answer:</u>
Judicial review is the power of the Judicial Branch to review laws, Executive orders, and Executive acts to ensure they are Constitutional and are not in conflict with higher authorities.
Option: (A)
<u>Explanation:</u>
- Judicial review ensures that the laws made by legislative and executed by executive doesn’t violate the terms of a constitution.
- Judicial review is one among the "balances" and "checks" in separation of power.
- Judicial review supervises legislative and executive to form laws that doesn’t conflicts with the 'constitution'.
- Judicial review invalids the laws that violates the 'terms of a constitution'.
Answer:Peasants' Revolt, also called Wat Tyler's Rebellion, (1381), first great popular rebellion in English history. Its immediate cause was the imposition of the unpopular poll tax of 1380, which brought to a head the economic discontent that had been growing since the middle of the century.Sep 27, 2022
Title / Office: king (1377-1399), England
Key People: John Ball Richard II Simon Of Sud...
Notable Family Members: father Edward the Bl...
Date: 1381
Explanation:
Answer:
Canada has a vast geography that occupies much of the continent of North America, sharing land borders with the contiguous United States to the south and the U.S. state of Alaska to the northwest. Canada stretches from the Atlantic Ocean in the east to the Pacific Ocean in the west; to the north lies the Arctic Ocean.
