<p>1) polar
2) beguiled…havoc
3) peremptory
4) penchant…enmity
5) analogous
6) derisive…(?)
7) jovial
8) culled…truncated
9) scavenges
10) deliberate…work</p>
<p>@ eagles94 YES I DID OMGGGGG :D</p>
<p>lol @nik</p>
<p>I was flipping out cause I was like holy crap, something must be wrong but I couldnt find anything wrong lol. Screw CB for doing this. I was really tempted to change my answer just cause of that.</p>
<p>Also on the electoral system passage, did you guys get 4 straight A’s starting from the beguile…havoc question?</p>
<p>What was the answer to the question about the extreme political demagogues/ doctrine? I know the first option was beguiled/havoc and the last was something/controversy. I guessed the latter but I’m thinking the answer is the former…</p>
<p>@nik Yea, im pretty sure its argue against change. He was using the quote in a larger context to show that we don’t need to change. Beside, the only other one was “support an undertaking”. Undertaking doesn’t really fit with the gist of the paragraph. The other was “qualification”, but it wasnt a qualification as to an example.</p>
<p>Nevermind haha</p>
<p>it was argue against change</p>
<p>AND</p>
<p>it was “beguiled… havoc”</p>
<p>@eagles94</p>
<p>I think I did!
(The 3As and 3Ds)</p>
<p>@chillbro: Yes, I had experimental math and didn’t have the section you’re referring to! In the clear :)</p>
<p>what about the electorate one. did you guys get like 4 straight A’s?</p>
<p>@eagle
Yeah, I noticed that when taking the test too! (the chinese one)</p>
<p>I don’t know about the 4 a’s for the college one</p>
<p>I’m banking on -4 for a 760 (so 62 out of 67 points). Is that reasonable?</p>
<p>The second blank for the one with derisive is characterization</p>
<p>-4 for a 760? that’s a little harsh i thought bcuz the vocabulary was advanced and bcuz of the electoral passage, it would be more like -3 800, -4 780</p>
<p>@forsworn99</p>
<p>I think 760 is likely according to erikthered.</p>
<p>Are you guys sure about the deliberate…work sentence? I do not disagree that this combination works, however, I sat there thinking that the rapid…theorizing could also work. While of course it makes sense that the scientist acted deliberate and maintained a good pace so that her “work” of researching was not rushed, you can insert the other option. If one looks to the entire process science, you can argue that, by rushing (“rapid”) the stage of theorizing, you make more time for the research, which she wants to avoid rushing.</p>
<p>Anyone else agree? Maybe I’m stretching it too far.</p>
<p>Yea you are lol. Definitely deliberate…work.</p>
<p>I kinda forget the polar sentence? What was it?</p>
<p>You guys make me feel all warm inside. :)</p>
<p>What was the “analogous” one? I forgot the question.</p>