Read the texts from an article in which five people talked about Clinton. For questions 61 to 65, match the name of each person

admin2011-02-28  35

问题    Read the texts from an article in which five people talked about Clinton. For questions 61 to 65, match the name of each person (1 to 5 ) to one of the statements ([A] to[G]) given below. Mark your answers on your ANSWER SHEET 1.
Dee:
   Clinton’s supporters have their own cognitive-dissonance theory: Americans have been bamboozled by a vicious, well-financed conservative opposition, and by an unsympathetic press corps, into believing that Clinton is deeply morally flawed.  But they support his policies and perhaps will come to reappraise him personally on the basis of his manifest desire to make life better for them.
Madse:
   Some Clinton opponents have an even darker psychological explanation, which is that Americans have become so cynical about politics that they expect their elected officials to be morally compromised—liars, unprincipled political opportunists, financial finaglers—and no longer hold egregious vices against the politicians they vote for. A variation on this theory blames the press and the press and the political system for scandal overload. Overdosing on exposes and special prosecutors, the public—while amiably willing to believe in general that politicians are corrupt—has lost its capacity for outrage at any particular new disclosure. A Clinton-friendly version of this theory holds that the mud doesn’t stick because it shouldn’t stick.
Hubert:
    Leave the fancy psychological theorizing aside. Times are good. Growth is ready, unemployment and inflation are low, the deficit is way down. Elections in peace-time are always a referendum on the economy. Voters may not be certain whether Clinton deserves the credit, but they may not care. They won’t dislodge the incumbent under these sunny circumstances.
Dora:
    The two words are shorthand for the proposition that the solution to the Clinton mystery is his opponent. Even may Republicans seem to believe that only be nominating a hopeless candidate could they manage to be losing to such a vulnerable incumbent. If Dole in fact loses, the question of how a ruthlessly efficient election machine like the modern Republican Party managed to bungle its nomination so badly will be often pondered. Even if he wins somehow, the question probably won’t go away. How did it happen? Dole, goodness knows, represents no strong ideological position. He has no large popular following. He has no natural campaign skills that cry out to be exploited. Although an admirable person in many ways, Dole is not, in short he end point of any rational selection process for a major party’s presidential nomination. In retrospect, the Republican seem to have anointed Dole out of such admirably unpragmatic, old-fashioned motives as honoring achievement and deference to seniority that were thought to be long dead in the Grand Old Party. Which bring us to....
Frank:
   The last explanation for the Clinton mystery. Is this the luckiest guy around, or what? Count on that becoming o theme if Clinton wins, He wins the presidency with a minority of the vote, he loses Congress for his party and it ends up helping him, the opposition party accidentally gives its nomination to a hopeless candidate: these ale just the latest lucky breaks for a politician who fortuitously, as a teenager, had his picture taken with President John Kennedy. No wonder he still believes in a place called Hope!
   Now match each or the man (1 to 5)to the appropriate statement.
   Note: there are two extra statements.
                      Statements
   [A] Cognitive dissonance.
   [B] He is a slick politician.
   [C] Bob Dole is not efficient.
   [D] Both American political parties have survived long term by accommodating reality.
   [E] Clinton is a millionaire.
   [F] It really is the economy.
   [G] Luck.
Dora

选项

答案[C]

解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/BlzsFFFM
0

最新回复(0)