here is a public debate between the three candidates for the U.S. Senate. During the debate, the topics of oil and energy are addressed. Each candidate expressed their view on the issue: Edgar Eisenhower: "We need to cut our dependence on foreign oil. Instead, let's use the natural world around us. Think about the sun, wind, water, the heat of the earth, and the crops in our fields. These will make for affordable energy in the 21st century. We should fund research in those areas. Let us also increase tax credits for private investment in clean, renewable sources of energy." Rebecca Roosevelt: "We need to cut our dependence on foreign oil and develop a national energy strategy. We should provide tax incentives for producing energy in the U.S. Let's increase U.S. supplies of coal, oil, and natural gas. We should promote environmentally responsible exploration and development of oil and gas reserves. That includes federal land like Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge. Let's also advance clean coal technology." Terrance Taft: "Looking at our energy supply is one thing—how we're using it is another. We can drive smaller, more fuel efficient cars. We can invest in more efficient technology for our homes and businesses. These things add up and make a big difference. In fact, in several new buildings associated with Taft Inc., we address our energy needs with locally produced renewable energy. That wouldn't be possible if we were using outdated, energy guzzling technology." Often politicians will agree that something is a priority, but have very different recommendations on how to best address it. What would be the best example of this from the previous section? Both Terrance Taft and Edgar Eisenhower agree that inefficiency is bad, but disagree on how to make things more efficient. Both Rebecca Roosevelt and Edgar Eisenhower agree that we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but disagree on the best way of doing so. Both Terrance Taft and Rebecca Roosevelt agree that alternative energy is important, but disagree about which form would be the best to invest in. Both Rebecca Roosevelt and Terrance Taft agree that developing alternative energy sources is important, but differ on the best way of doing so.
Well to start off it says "Often politicians will agree that something is a priority"
Witch 2 polititcians statments start off the same?
I would say B because they are the only two statments that start off the same but have diffrent ways of solving the same issue
Dose that make sense @marc1313
no im confused ? @shamallamadingdong
Well lets read the question "Often politicians will agree that something is a priority, but have very different recommendations on how to best address it. What would be the best example of this from the previous section"
this is asking which statment from above have the same main idea aka cutting our dependence on foreign oil but have different ways of doing it
i think i understand know
A. says we need to cut our oil and he say we are gonna instead run off of natural energy ,the sun ,water,wind ,ect.
B. says we also need to cut oil but says we are going to run off of somthing else and not natural energy,......... so at the beging they ave the same idea to cut our oil but different ways of getting energy
oh but could it also be D
No because Taft dosent think/start out the same way "he dosent have the same ideas as the other politicans
He says dont cut oil
Do you understand it now?
i have one more question