These are prompts that I need to be done (all 3 of them). they each require 20 sentences questions do count as a sentence. The prompts also require research, sources, and citations. Critical Thinking that meets the core objective Options/positions are stated and supported Explanation of the issue is clear/complete and consequences to various decisions are explained to some extent The evidence is adequate to support some positions Conclusions are stated with minimal discrepancies Critical Thinking that does not meet core objective Fails to state or identify various decision options/positions regarding the issue. No clear position is presented or supported by the evidence presented Explanation of the issue is poor, incomplete, or unclear Evidence given to support positions is insufficient or non-existent Fails to come to any significant conclusion or conclusion cannot be supported by evidence provided 1. a) Developing your opinion while using all four elements of critical thinking, might there ever be a time or place where a totalitarian form of government in a given country might be a better choice over a constitutional democracy/republic? As we all know, autocratic governments are much more efficient, in terms of creating policy and operation, than a democracy. b) Please explain what place and what time you can see totalitarian being superior to democracy/republic. c) Meet the four elements of CRITICAL THINKING given to you above in developing your response! 2. While you may or may not support a totalitarian government, perhaps an off-shoot – a benevolent dictatorship – is superior to constitutional democracy? (Wordnik definition of a benevolent dictator: “A dictator that has power because the people choose to allow him/her to; who must make wise use of power since the benevolent dictatorship system allows them to be peaceably removed from office”) Using the four elements of critical thinking, justify your conclusion. 3. Thinking critically (while addressing the four elements of critical thinking), what is the alternative to lobbyists in a constitutional democracy? a) Is there an alternative? b) Are lobbies and lobbyists and their power a necessary evil, or are they evil at all? c) In the end, do they really provide a societal service?