Answer:
<em>1.</em><em> </em><em>Because</em><em> </em><em>he</em><em> </em><em>wants</em><em> </em><em>his</em><em> </em><em>opinion</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>be</em><em> </em><em>heard</em><em> </em><em>not</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>mention</em><em> </em><em>with</em><em> </em><em>Mr</em><em> </em><em>Con.</em><em> </em><em>Mr</em><em> </em><em>Con</em><em> </em><em>want</em><em> </em><em>things</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>go</em><em> </em><em>accordingly</em><em>.</em><em> </em>
<em>2.</em><em> </em><em>Because</em><em> </em><em>he</em><em> </em><em>feels</em><em> </em><em>that</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>Roosevelt</em><em> </em><em>does not</em><em> </em><em>make</em><em> </em><em>good</em><em> </em><em>decisions</em><em> </em><em>nowadays</em><em> </em><em>they</em><em> </em><em>intend</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>make</em><em> </em><em>people</em><em> </em><em>angrier</em><em> </em><em>every time</em><em> </em><em>because</em><em> </em><em>of</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>decision</em><em> </em><em>they</em><em> </em><em>take</em><em>.</em><em> </em>
<span>the Democratic parties staying together rather than splitting
That's MY answer...</span>
Answer:
Speaker A differs from B because of one reason, which is this story: money
"A" has a good point by thinking that if you have enough money to buy a house on the spot, you shouldn't need to gain Social Security. But heres one thing "A" doesn't think about: what if said person runs out of money. The point of Social Security is to give money to the people that paid their taxes and if your retired. If your retired, you don't have a job, which means the only money you would be getting back is Social Security. Now, this starts to make it sound like im siding with "B" yes I am. However, I think to even this out, lower the amount of Social Security you get so both "A" and "B" get an even share of their opinions.
(hope my mindset was in the right place for this question)
