<p>in the electoral question, the part where they ask the effect on presidential campaigns, one of the answers was that they would focus on battleground states more b/c of the winner-take-all format. that’s good right?</p>
<p>That’s what I put… Except I said states with more votes rather than battleground. I’m assuming that’s the same thing…</p>
<p>-The Battleground Coot66</p>
<p>I loved the electoral college question. We discussed the winner-take-all system in my govt class the Friday before the exam. :D</p>
<p>i said battleground states</p>
<p>battleground states are not necessarily states with more votes
they are the states that could swing either way and whose votes could make a difference in the outcome (i.e. florida, ohio)</p>
<p>certain states (like california, which has more votes than florida and ohio combined) are not in play</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t know there was a term for that. I meant the same thing, but I said “close” states. haha</p>
<p>i talked about how strategically, candidates will not campaign as much in states such as california as it will typically swing democratic… they’ll mostly concentrate on battleground states taht can swing either way…</p>
<p>Does it count if I mention that later in my essays? That some states will typically vote a certain way, such as California as Democrat and Texas as Republican? Cause I’m pretty sure for my answer I said that candidates will focus on the LARGER states since they equal more electoral votes…</p>
<p>My two major issues: 2 and 3
2 - first chose lemon v. kurtzmann; “establishment clause”; said that it ruled against public fiunding for private religious schools and included provisions like wording of laws needs to be secular; said use of lemon test to determine violation of separation of church and state; second chose oregon; “free exercise clause”; said that it ruled against using drugs for religious reasons ecause reduced workplace productivity (that was wrong, i know); said that two ways to go limit effectiveness: 1) pres can rally public against decision; 2) congress can pass laws that abide by decision but still implement ideas ruled against (e.g. lemon v. kurtzman evaded with vouchers and SC upheld in zleman v. ohio)</p>
<p>3 - conflct is that pres is commander in cheif and congress declares war; two provisions: 1) pres needs to consent with congress when sending troops (is that too vague?); 2) congress has power of investigation and oversight in times of war (im pretty sure that’s wrong); other powers congress has is funding military and ratifyig treaties</p>
<p>BOTTOM LINE: DO YOU THINK I EARNED A GOOD ENOUGH PORTION OF POINTS ON THIS (INCLUDING MY TWO REALLY GOOD ANSWERS FOR FIRST AND LAST QUESTIONS) TO SCORE A 4 OR A 5 (IF I THINK I GOT LIKE AT LEAST 90% RIGHT ON MC)?</p>
<p>p.s. for the electoral college one why it;s not abolsiehd: amendment has never been passed and although brought up from time to time has never passed; minorities have bigger say when their electoral power is limited to a state (e.g. blacks in the south have more political clout because they make up a larger percentage of the populaton in those states than they do nationwide), thus their power would be diluted if the vote became nationwide and they’re opposed to changing the system. that seems right, no?</p>
<p>is that for thsi year? cuz i dont remember that question…</p>
<p>this is the only exam, i feal, i did good on, cause if i didnt ill blow!!!</p>
<p>yes i thought 3 was the hardest,
but here is a link *dont forget there already released on CB so its legal)</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution</a></p>
<p>"first chose lemon v. kurtzmann; “establishment clause”; said that it ruled against public fiunding for private religious schools "</p>
<p>I think public funding is allowed for private religious schools only if it used for secular purposes, like textbooks and sports equipment, and I also wrote all the prongs of the Lemon test as well. That is what I wrote…will I get any points for that…or is that a wrong analysis?</p>
<p>christalena2 that sounds perfect. you will score big points for actually knowing the criteria of the lemon test.</p>
<p>Oh and puppylover…you wrote: “electoral college i said would never be abolished because the littler states (like new jersey) would never allow it, because their role in the election would go down even more than it already is. i don’t remember my other reasoning…”</p>
<p>Either you or I got it backwards. I wrote that larger states, like California, wouldnt want to change the electoral college because it currently gives them more power. Smaller states, like New Jersey, want a more equal representation…like how the senate works. I also wrote that another reason reform hasn’t passed is because there is no better replacement. That’s what my review book said…so i wrote it.</p>
<p>“christalena2 that sounds perfect. you will score big points for actually knowing the criteria of the lemon test.”</p>
<p>Sweet…thanks!</p>
<p>And I actually knew the precedent for the Reynolds case…which is 'No Religion is above the Law" or something like that…so I was glad that was on there.</p>
<p>Im glad this score will balance my extremely low score from calc today.</p>
<p>Ok, my review book says that, “A change [in the Electoral College] would have to come through a Consitutional Amendment, and large states will not easily give up this form of dominance and control.”</p>
<p>So either my review book is wrong, or everyone that put that smaller states don’t want to give it up are wrong. </p>
<p>Sorry Im writing like six posts in a row.</p>
<p>i said because of tradition and that the 3/4 of the states required to add an amendment would never be successful b/c the small states would never consent to it</p>
<p>^^ Again, does anybody know which one would be correct? Would small states or large states not agree to any changes in the electoral college system? I wrote large. </p>
<p>Do you think sentence formation and flow matter a lot?</p>
<p>I definitely had some fragments and pretty bad syntax throughout.</p>
<p>I don’t think sentence flow matters. At least it shouldn’t. Logically, large states is the correct answer, seeing as the electoral college doesn’t help small states…</p>
<p>-The Flowing Coot66</p>
<p>For the last part of the War Resolutions response, I said that Congress is responsible for the appropriations of the war and has the power to enact even more limitations such that of the War Resolution Act.</p>