PLEASE HELP QUICKLY: (FIRST ANSWER GETS BRAINLIEST! 50 POINTS EACH!) How did the French Revolution affect American politics?

A. It united political parties. Americans saw the French as fellow republicans revolting against monarchy.

B. It caused a political divide. Democratic Republicans supported the Revolution while Federalists opposed it.

C. It united political parties. The French were fighting against Great Britain as the Americans had.

B. It caused a political divide. Democratic Republicans supported the Revolution while Federalists opposed it.

Explanation:

At first, the Americans thought that the French revolution would make France an ally against Britain, but it didn't turn out as expected.

The "French Revolution" made the political division worse. The Democratic Republican party was headed by Thomas Jefferson while the Federalist party was headed by Alexander Hamilton. The two parties were opposed to each other. The Democratic Republican party was pro-French Revolution while the Federalist party didn't want to ruin the ties with Britain, especially when it comes to business reasons.

c) troops march forward in close formation against newer, more accurate weapons

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is