Help me pleassse

Read the sentence. on days when i go jogging in the morning, my mind seems to process ideas faster, and my mood is more positive. how does the underlined clause add variety and meaning to the sentence? select two options. it describes the days being discussed. it makes readers want to go jogging. it creates a compound-complex sentence. it adds detail about the speaker's personality. it explains why jogging is beneficial. save and exit next submit mark this and retum

Ineed advice. i have a lot of friends at school but recently my best friend for some reason didn’t like our friend group. she wanted to switch to a new table during lunch. she said she found a new table where we would be welcomed if i wanted to come. i agreed because i knew i would continue to talk to them outside of lunch. after a month or two, my best friend got mad at our new lunch table group. so she left for a day or two, but i stayed because i actually kinda liked it there, even if it was kinda crazy. then she came back to the table. eventually i started to miss my old friends at my old lunch table. so i went over there for one lunch. then after lunch i sat at my new lunch spot before the bell rang. they all called me a traitor. so now i sit with my old lunch group, which is fine because i missed them, but i also miss my new, now old, lunch table. what should i do? p.s. sorry if you loose your last brain cells trying to understand this.

In a debate focused specifically on the topic of whether new laws are needed to prevent distracted driving, the following argument is made. which type of special appeal does it demonstrate? “my opponent is correct—distracted driving is very dangerous. many activities—texting, talking on the phone, looking at maps, eating breakfast—all of these contribute to accidents. yes, we have statistics to support that. however, my opponent is totally ignoring the role that improper and inconsistent maintenance of your vehicle can also have in causing accidents! ” a. false analogy b. red herring c. bandwagon d. fallacy of argument from ignorance