In a democracy disagreeing on the public interest is allowed

An artist entered into a written agreement to sell a patron a partially finished painting once it was complete. the patron later learned that the artist planned to sell the painting to a third party who offered to pay the artist more than the contract price. the patron filed suit to compel the artist to sell the painting to her in accord with the terms of their agreement, while the artist denied that the painting the artist planned to sell to the third party was the subject of the agreement with the patron. at trial, the patron did not introduce the written agreement or explain its absence. rather, the patron sought to testify that, when she signed the agreement, the artist had pointed to the painting in question and stated that it was the patron’s painting. the artist’s attorney objected to the testimony that the artist identified the painting as belonging to the patron. how should the court rule? asustain the objection, because the artist’s statement was hearsay. bsustain the objection, because the patron failed to produce the written agreement or explain its absence. coverrule the objection, because the statement is not hearsay. doverrule the objection, because the statement was relevant.

Which statement best describes an advantage of indirect democracy over direct democracy? a. it can make decision making more efficient b. it can citizens feel more connected to government c. it can be more responsive to citizens' interests d. it can better reflect the democratic principle of majority rule

In the years after world war ii, which of the following caused many people from asian and african countries to migrate to europe? a. the end of the soviet union b. new economic opportunities after colonialism ended c. the religious freedom found in europe d. new laws allowing greater numbers of immigrants into european countries