AP American History- Page 10

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/2/05 at 11:23pm

I'm not worried, I was just asking...


I'm going to head off to bed pretty soon, but I'll be back on-line tomorrow if you want some help.

[Jwei123]

Posted: 5/2/05 at 11:24pm

Yeah, me too actually...I have to do all my other HW now! Thanks so much...can't wait to be quizzed tomorrow! you're the best!

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 10:05am

Anybody ready to review? Or is it too early?

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 11:08am

I dropped this class in high school and got into regular history, it was a smart move. The A P history class was way too tough, and I LOVE history, but the teacher was WAY TOO HARD.

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 3:36pm

... Anybody ready for some more review questions?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:01pm

I'm ready, if you're still here.

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:16pm

Still here!


What was the purpose of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff?


Did it succeed?

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:17pm

I love this thread since I was a history major and a teacher for a couple of years. I just noticed a wrong answer a couple pages back though.
Nixon may have won the popular vote, but that is only if you subscribe to the vote tampering in Illinois theory the official results of the election have Kennedy winning the popular vote.
I love the thread though, I loved my AP history class and pulling the 5 on it made me decide to add it to my other major and minors in college. I pulled the old double, double.

Here are the totals for 1960:
John F. Kennedy
Democratic
34,226,731 (49.9%)
303**

Richard M. Nixon
Republican
34,108,157 (49.7%)
219


* Because candidates receiving less than 1 percent of the popular vote are omitted from this table, the sum of the listed percentages of popular votes earned may not total 100.

** Harry F. Byrd received 15 electoral votes.

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:19pm

THANKS for the additional info, Penguin...


Now, who can tell me about the Smoot-Hawley Tariff?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:22pm

It was really bad for the economy right? Didn't it make the tariff really high to try to help the economy, but didn't work. I guess that's kind of what a lot of tariffs do though.

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:30pm

You're gettin' there, Ashley.


When Hoover ran for President, he promised to help the Depressed Farmers who were not doing all that well--even during the prosperous 1920s.

To help aid them, Congress passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930, which raised the Tarif on exported goods OBNOXIOUSLY high.


Many historians have written that this Act caused the Depression--but this is not the case--it was the Stock Market Crash in 1929 which started the Depression. Anyway, because Tariffs were so freakin' high, European exports fell to an all-time low; and this being the Depression (which hit Europe as well), the American farmers did not find the expanded markets for their goods Hoover had anticipated.

All the Tariff succeeded in doing was causing a lot of ill will between America and the European countries. Like most of Hoover's polcies, it didn't really help anybody or anything. However, a lof of these Tariffs remained on the books until after World War II was over.


Why was Spiro Agnew forced to resign as Vice-President?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:37pm

Was he the mentally insane guy?

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:41pm

Huh?


No... Agnew was forced to resign because he was caught in Tax Evasion...


Oh, I just remembered--you're thinking of the Democratic Vice-Presidential Candidate who stepped down because he had visited a Psychiatrist... I believe that was Evanston...


Andrew Johnson was NOT impeached because he fell how many votes short of the 2/3 majority required from the Senate?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:42pm

1

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:45pm

Smoot-Hawley, Spiro T., and Andrew Johnson back to back to back. I'm loving just reading this stuff!

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:48pm

EXCELLENT, Ashley!


(And thanks for your support, Penguin)


Okay. Everyone knows that the Federal Government is divided into three sections: The Executive, The Legislative, and The Judicial.


Who is the ONLY official who serves in more than one branch at the same time?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:50pm

No idea. President?

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:54pm

Close. The ONLY Federal Official who serves in two branches of the Government simultaneously is The Vice-President (Executive) who is also the President of The Senate (Legislative).


During Reconstruction, many Southern States added "The Grandfather Clause" to their voting procedures.


What did it say, and what did it attempt to do?

[ashley0139]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 4:56pm

It tried to prevent blacks in the south from voting, right? By adding taxes or something.

[check your personality]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 5:05pm

The grandfather clause said that a black man could vote only if his grandfather had been able to vote - it was a method of disenfranchising blacks because at the time, no blacks' grandfathers would have been permitted to vote because they were slaves.

This was during Reconstruction, yes? Updated On: 5/3/05 at 05:05 PM

[ElphieDefiesGravity]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 5:07pm

What she ^^^^ said!

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 5:12pm

Yep. CYP summed it up perfectly.


What was the purpose of The Panama Canal? What system was used so boats could navigate through it?

[check your personality]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 5:13pm

Why, thank you.

Was the purpose of the Panama Canal to make it easier for trade in the Pacific?

[ElphieDefiesGravity]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 5:14pm

Wasn't it so it would be easier to get ships (like for war) from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans?

[Mary_Ethel]

Posted: 5/3/05 at 5:16pm

Sort of.


Before the Canal, boats had to navigate threw both sides of the coasts of South Ameica to reach the Pacific.

The Panama Canal provided a Southern Route from the East Coast of South America to the West--via a man-made Canal that was connected via a series of "locks".


What did the Monroe Doctrine State?