Compare the 2008 and 2012 turnouts by ethnicity. next analyze what the comparisons of 2008 and 2012 mean in terms of the political parties. write a 250-word essay comparing the elections in terms of voter turnout among different voting groupsânamely, african americans, hispanics, and young people. explain in your own words how changes (if any) in the voting styles of these groups affected the elections.

early human migrations are the earliest migrations and expansions of archaic and modern humans across continents and are believed to have begun approximately 2 million years ago with the out of africa migration of homo erectus. this initial migration was followed by other archaic humans including h. heidelbergensis, which lived around 500,000 years ago and was the likely ancestor of both denisovans and neanderthals. early hominids were said to have "crossed land bridges that were eventually covered in water" .

within africa, homo sapiens dispersed around the time of its speciation, roughly 300,000 years ago.the "recent african origin" paradigm suggests that the anatomically modern humans outside of africa descend from a population of homo sapiens migrating from east africa roughly 70,000 years ago and spreading along the southern coast of asia and to oceania before 50,000 years ago. modern humans spread across europe about 40,000 years ago.

the migrating modern human populations are known to have interbred with local varieties of archaic humans, so that contemporary human populations are descended in small part (below 10% contribution) from regional varieties of archaic humans.

after the last glacial maximum, north eurasian populations migrated to the americas about 20,000 years ago. northern eurasia was peopled after 12,000 years ago, in the beginning holocene. arctic canada and greenland were reached by the paleo-eskimo expansion around 4,000 years ago. finally, polynesia was peopled after 2,000 years ago, by the austronesian expansion.

cold

very very cold

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

answer: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

explanation: