Imagine that you live in a state where there isn't enough food, banks have lost your money, and everyone is poor. You are interviewing newly-elected President Roosevelt, who says he is going to work on solving these problems. You ask him, "What did you do to cause these problems?" How would the President receive this question?

a) Negatively, because it presumes that the president is to blame

b) Positively, because this question asks him to clarify his actions

c) Positively, because this question appropriately challenges him

d) Negatively, because it doesn't actively involve him in the discussion

The President would receive this question:

a) Negatively, because it presumes that the president is to blame.

Explanation:

Let's turn this situation around for a moment. Imagine that your car breaks suddenly and you call for help. The mechanic arrives, takes a look at your car, and asks you, "What have you done to break this car?" You would certainly receive this question negatively. The mechanic is blaming you for the car problem, even though he has no evidence that you caused it. Even if the question didn't anger you, it would still be annoying.

The same principle applies to the question asked to the president. He is basically being accused of being part of the problem. Even if that were true, the effect of such a question would be negative. President Roosevelt would probably feel attacked. His focus on solutions would be taken away, the audience now eager for a response concerning the implied accusation.

Victoria's goal is a MAD goal it is effective

Explanation:

It is measurable: she needs to buy a ticket and a dress. It is attainable: she will babysit and earn $40 per week. It is deadline driven: she will earn the money in the next 5 week

hope this helps