<em>"The Electoral College", </em>set out in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, allows states to have the same power of votes in spite of their number of population.
Due to that, a party could outcast the presidential candidate they don't want, even if such candidate was elected by the majority.
The parties nominate electors, usually by a central committee or the conventions; so when voters cast their ballot for President, they are actually voting for their <em>"State's Electors"</em>, who are not obliged to follow the results of the popular vote, thus sometimes <em>“faithless electors”</em> adversely choose a candidate they're not committed to.
A <em>"faithless elector</em><em>"</em> is simply a member of the "<em>Electoral College</em>" who votes against the party's candidate.
Thereby the answer is (B): <em>"It allows for faithless electors, or electors who do not vote according to the wishes of their states"</em>
The Treaty of Tordesillas neatly divided the “New World” of the Americans between the two superpowers. Spain and Portugal divided the new world by drawing a line in the Atlantic Ocean, about 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde Islands, then controlled by Portugal.
the answer is C. Generally appointed based on political connections.
You’re Welcome....
In mental trigger list discussed in Dave Crenshaw's training video helps sort gathering points.
One of the concepts Dave discusses is reducing the sources of raw materials in order to increase productivity. He refers to this as a gathering place.
Simply put, a collection point is a location for unprocessed objects like your voicemail, paper tray, or email inbox. It is a location where things are kept while you think about what to do with them.
Some colleges have used his books The Myth of Multitasking: How "Doing It All" Gets Nothing Done and Invaluable: The Secret to Becoming Irreplaceable as teaching resources.
To learn more about Dave Crenshaw here brainly.com/question/10189796
#SPJ4
I believe the answer is: <span>negatively correlated
According to the study conducted by Zimmerman, the more time infants spent in watching the media, the less time they would have in observing and being involved with actual interaction with human beings, which eventually led the stunt in vocabulary development.</span>