Passage 1: Vote for Gordon for class president. As Gordon's best friend since third grade, I can tell you that this guy knows how to have a good time. From tree forts and cartoons to laser tag, football, and video games, I've seen firsthand that anything Gordon does becomes fun. He can even make school entertaining. Vote for Gordon. Passage 2: Vote for Gordon for class president. After serving as vice president last year, Gordon is a natural choice for our class this year. He knows how student government works, and he proved it by planning three successful dances last year — the Fall Fling, Winter Wiggle, and Spring Shindig — as well as the end-of-year field day. Gordon also convinced Principal Dapple to install a vending machine outside the gym. He'll get even better results as president. Vote for Gordon. Which statement best compares the ways that the two arguments use appeals?

A. Passage 1 appeals to ethics by talking about the speaker's friendship with Gordon, while passage 2 appeals to logic by citing facts about Gordon's accomplishments.
B. Passage 1 appeals to ethics by citing the speaker's deep knowledge of Gordon's character, while passage 2 appeals to emotion by emphasizing the audience's school spirit.
C. Passage 1 appeals to emotion by drawing on positive feelings of friendship, while passage 2 appeals to logic by listing facts without explaining why they are important.
D. Passage 1 appeals to logic by giving facts about Gordon's background, while passage 2 appeals to emotion by referencing the audience's shared experience.

idk but i did find this

explanation:

in the story of the cowardly lion and the hungry tiger, we first see the two characters inside the empty throne room of ozma, bored and sadly very much aware of their uselessness as guardians. they talked about the good old days when they used to be feared. they proceeded to make up stories of how fearsome they were. the cowardly lion professed that he can tear men/women into pieces, while the hungry tiger said he would eat fat babies. but when they proceeded to act upon their words they were forced to realize that they were indeed harmless and good animals who would rather be called cowardly and hungry than harm a woman or eat a child.

i would like to compare these two interpretations of the crucible : 1) eric christ's interretation and wade bradford's interpretation. the main differences between there interretaions is that in the first one you can notice direct link to joseph mccarthy whereas the second one represents how the town is filled with hysteria.the second interpretation shows that author believes that the story   about puritan town in salem is based on actual events while the first example shows the sencible reference to sort of bias.

ich statement best shows a problem in travels with charley?

one sharp difficulty presented itself. in the intervening twenty-five years my name had become reasonably well known.

this being so, my trip demanded that i leave my name and my identity at home.

i had to go alone and i had to be self-contained, a kind of casual turtle carrying his house on his back.

with all this in mind i wrote to the head office of a great corporation which manufactures trucks.