1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Olenka [21]
3 years ago
13

Which of the following did not lead to the development of a two-party system?

History
1 answer:
Tom [10]3 years ago
4 0

The development of a two-party system did not result from <em>A. the selection of presidential candidates from "the Virginia Dynasty."</em>

The two-party system, which started with the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, continued to develop until during the controversial presidential election of 1824 between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson.

The two-party system developed over concerns over the <em>abolition of slavery, voting of virtuous candidates, and the financial crisis of 1819.</em>

Thus, the <em>selection of presidential candidates from "the Virginia Dynasty" </em>did not develop the two-party system in the US.

Learn more: brainly.com/question/22145566

You might be interested in
Mark Yes if the statement is a reason people wanted to restrict immigration. Mark No if it is not.
Troyanec [42]
The answer will be yes
3 0
4 years ago
What year did the first people come too america
yanalaym [24]

Answer:

The first permanent English settlements were at Jamestown (1607) (along with its satellite, Bermuda in 1609) and Plymouth (1620), in what are today Virginia and Massachusetts respectively.

Explanation:

im cool

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What section is free settlers? (missouri compromise)​
Bess [88]

Answer:

In 1820, amid growing sectional tensions over the issue of slavery, the U.S. Congress passed a law that admitted Missouri to the Union as a slave state and Maine as a free state, while banning slavery from the remaining Louisiana Purchase lands located north of the 36º 30' parallel

6 0
4 years ago
What did staying neutral during World War I do for the American economy?
zaharov [31]
B. It helped the economy.

In fact, it was not until the end of the World War I that the US began to be considered as a world super economic power. The reason after that is that by staying neutral the US supplyed and selled weapons and war equipment to both parties of the conflict, getting profit out of it.
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did mountains affect government in the ancient Greek city-states?
Helga [31]

Answer:

The mountains prevented large-scale farming and impelled the Greeks to look beyond their borders to new lands where fertile soil was more abundant.

Explanation:

6 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • Opponents of the New Deal criticized President
    10·1 answer
  • Why did the pope urban ll call for a crusade in 1095
    12·2 answers
  • What does suggest mean
    5·1 answer
  • Which country is implicated (shown to be involved) in sponsoring the attack in Beirut, Lebanon?
    6·1 answer
  • Why was it a problem for the USA that China turned Communist to n 1949
    14·1 answer
  • What was the decision of the Galileo when he was talking to the church ?serious answer only please
    8·1 answer
  • Which of the following events was a direct consequence of the Islamic Revolution?
    10·2 answers
  • The first written constitution in America was the?
    10·2 answers
  • What is a natures resource
    10·2 answers
  • Bill S.2937 originated (began) in the
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!