The leader of a political party says a rival political party is "irresponsible because they are destroying the livelihood of millions of southwestern ranchers with their policies." an economist not affiliated with any political party cites data saying that the same ranchers "have sustained a 5 percent increase in taxes when purchasing feed." which statement best describes how the two statements compare?
a. both statements use emotive language.
b. both statements are most likely facts.
c. the first statement is more likely uses evasive language and the second is more likely emotive language.
d. the first statement is more likely uses emotive language and the second is more likely a fact. e
e. both statements use evasive language.

d. The first statement is more likely uses emotive language and the second is more likely a fact.

Explanation:

What is emotive langauge?

Emotive langauge is a langauge or a choice of words which are used in order to receive a particular emotional response.

Looking at the statement above made by the leader of this political party about the rivalry part it is likely that he expect people to think why would they vote for a party that is destroying millions of ranchers with their policies.

A leader of an opposing party would want people to look at their rivalry party negatively so that they may cast their votes to them instead of the rivalry party.

On the other hand an independent economist who has no association with both parties will only give an objective statement which will be based on researched information.

can you show the map

yes, since there is a positive and a negetive if the positive and negitive wasn't there wouldn't a flow electricity in it.