2018年10月自考英语二真题,2018年10月自考英语（二）阅读强化辅导【17-20】

【#自考# 导语】芬芳袭人花枝俏，喜气盈门捷报到。心花怒放看通知，梦想实现今日事。喜笑颜开忆往昔，勤学苦读最美丽。继续扬鞭再向前，前途无量正灿烂。努力备考，愿你前途无量,考入理想院校。以下是®文档大全网为大家整理的《2018年10月自考英语（二）阅读强化辅导【17-20】》 供您查阅。

【篇一】

The Campaign for Election

　　Although presidential elections occur every 4 years, many people feel that they do not have a true understanding of how presidential campaigns operate.

　　The winner in the November general election is almost certain to be either the Republican or the Democratic nominee. A minor-party or independent candidate, such as George Wallace in 1968, John Anderson in 1980, or Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996, can draw votes away from the major-party nominees but stands almost no chance of defeating them.

　　A major-party nominee has the critical advantage of support from the party faithful. Earlier in the twentieth century, this support was so firm and steady that the victory of the stronger party's candidate was almost a certainty. Warren G. Harding accepted the 1920 Republican nomination at his Ohio home, stayed there throughout most of the campaign, and won a full victory simply because most of the voters of his time were Republicans. Party loyalty has declined in recent decades, but more than two-thirds of the nation's voters still identify themselves as Democrats or Republicans, and most of them support their party's presidential candidate. Even Democrat George McGovern, who had the lowest level of party support among recent nominees, was backed in 1972 by nearly 60 percent of his party'svoters.

　　Presidential candidates act strategically. In deciding whether to pursue a course of action, they try to estimate its likely impact on the voters. During the 1992 campaign, a sign on the wall of Clinton's headquarters in Little Rock read, "The economy, Stupid." The slogan was the idea of James Carville, Clinton's chief strategist, and was meant as a reminder to the candidate and the staff to keep the campaign focused on the nation's slow-moving economy, which ultimately was the issue that defeated Bush. As in 1980, when Jimmy Carter lostto Ronald Reagan during tough economic times, the voters were motivated largely by a desire for change.

　　Candidates try to project a strong leadership image. Whether voters accept this image, however, depends more on external factors than on a candidate's personal characteristics. In 1991, after the

　　Gulf War, bush's approval rating reached 91 percent, the highest level recorded since polling began in the 1930s. A year later, with the nation's economy in trouble, Bush's approval rating dropped below 40 percent. Bush tried to stir images of his strong leadership of the war, but voters remained concerned about the economy.

　　The candidates' strategies are shaped by many considerations, including the constitutional provision that each state shall have electoral votes equal in number to its representation in Congress.

　　Each state thus gets two electoral votes for its Senate representation and a varying number of electoral votes depending on its House representation. Altogether, there are 538 electoral votes (including three for the District of Columbia, even though it has no voting representatives in Congress). To win the presidency, a candidate must receive at least 270 votes, an electoral majority.

　　Candidates are particularly concerned with winning the states which have the largest population, such as California (with 54 electoral votes), New York (33), Texas (32), Florida (25), Pensylvania (23), lllinois (22), and Ohio (21). Victory in the eleven largest states alone would provide an electoral majority, and presidential candidates therefore spend most of their time campaigning in those states. Clinton recived only 43 percent of the popular vote in 1992, compared with Bush's 38 percent and Perot's 19 percent; but Clinton won in states that gave him an overwhelming 370 electoral votes, compared with 168 for Bush and none for Perot.

　　竞选活动

　　虽然总统竞争每四年举行一次，但是许多人感到对竞选大战的运作没有真正的理解。

　　11月份大选的获胜者几乎肯定是共和党或*党的提名者。小党派或独立候选人，如1968年的乔治·华莱士，1980年的约翰·安德森或1992年和1996年的罗丝·佩罗，可能从大党的提名人那里拉走了一些选票，但几乎没有人可能战胜他们。

　　大党提名人具有得到党的忠实信徒支持这一关键的优势。20世纪早期，这种支持是如此坚定、可靠，以至于较大党派候选人的胜利几乎是肯定的。华伦·G·哈定在俄亥俄州的家乡接受了1920年共和党的提名，并且在竞选大战大部分时间里都呆在俄亥俄。他大获全胜只是因为当时投票的大部分是共和党党员。在近几十年内，党员对党派的忠诚削弱了，但2/3强的国家的投票人依然认为他们自己是共和党人或*党人，他们大多支持自己党派的总统候选人。即使是来拥有最低水平党派支持的*人乔治·麦戈尔，在1972年仍得到了近60%本党派投票人的支持。

　　总统候选人的行为颇讲究策略。在决定是否遵循一项行动方针时，他们要尽量估计一下该方针对投票人可能具有的影响。在1992年竞选大战期间，小石城 克林顿竞选总部的墙上有一个牌子，上面写着"经济、蠢货"。这条标语是克林顿的首席战略詹姆斯·卡维尔的，主意，作为候选人和竞选班子全体成员的警世语，使这场竞选大战集中在国家缓慢增涨的经济上，这成为最后击败布什的策略。

　　如同在1980年的经济困难时期，吉米·卡特输给了罗纳德·里根，投票人的积极性主要来源于意图改变的愿望。

　　候选人尽办突出表现一种强有力的领导形象。然而，投票人是否接受这一形象，比起候选人的个人特点来更要依靠外部因素。在1991年海湾战争后，布什的支持率达到91%，这是本世纪30年代开始*测验以来的记录。一年后，因国民经济陷入困境，布什的支持率降低到40%以下。布什尽力去激起人们对他在战争时期强有力的领导形象的回忆，但投标票人依然关心经济问题。

　　候选人的策略的形成要考虑到许多因素，包括宪法的这一条款：每个州具有的选举人的票数与其在国会中的代表人数相同。因此，每个州因其参议院代表得到两张选举人票，依靠其众议院代表得到不同数量的选举人票。总共有538张选举人票。要赢得总统职务，一个候选人必须得到选举的多数票，即270张选票。

　　候选人特别关注是否能赢得人口最多的州，如加利福尼亚州(有54张选举人票)、纽约州(33张)、得克萨斯州(32张)、佛罗里达州(25 张)、宾夕法尼亚州(23张)、伊里诺伊斯州(22张)和俄亥俄州(21张)。仅在11个的州的胜利就可提供选举的大多数，因此总统候选人在那些州花费大部分时间进行活动。1992年，克林顿只得到43%的大众选票，相比之下布什得到38%，佩罗19%。但克林顿获取支持的州给了压倒优势的370张选举人票，相比之下给了布什168张，佩罗一张也没有。

【篇二】

The American Two-party System

　　No one now living in the United States can remember when the contest began between the Democratic and the Republican parties. It has been going on for more than a century, making it one of the oldestpolitical rivalries in the world.

　　The American political system is a classical example of the two-party system. When we say that we have a two-party system in the United States we do not mean that we have only two parties. Usually about a dozen parties nominate presidential candidates. We call it a two-party system because we have two large parties and a number of small parties, and the large parties are so large that we often forget about the rest. Usually the small parties collectively poll less than 5 per cent of the vote cast in national elections.

　　The democratic and Republican parties are the largest and most competitive organizations in the American community. The organize the electorate very simply by maintaining the two-party system. Americans almost inevitably become Democrats or Republicans because there is usually no other place for them go to. Moreover, because the rivalry of these parties is very old, most Americans know where they belong in the system. As a consequence of the dominance of the major parties, most elected officials are either Republicans or Democrats. Attempts to break up this old system have been made in every presidential election in the past one hundred years, but the system has survived all assaults.

　　How does it happen that the two-party system is so strongly rooted in American politics? The explanation is probably to be found in the way elections are conducted. In the United States, unlike countries with a parliamentary system of government, we elect not only the President, but a large number of other officials, about 800,000 of them. We also elect congressmen from single-member districts. For example, we elect 435 members of the House of Representatives from 435 districts (there are a few exceptions), one member for each district.

　　Statistically, this kind of election favors the major parties. The system of elections makes it easy for the major parties to maintain their dominant position, because they are likely to win more than >their share of the offices.

　　One of the great consequences of the system is that it produces majorities automatically. Because there are only two competiors in the running, it is almost inevitable that one will receive a majority.

　　Moreover, the system tends slightly to exaggerate the victory of the winning party. This is not always true, but the strong tendency to produce majorities is built into the system.

　　In over 200 years of constitutional history, Americans have learned much about the way in which the system can be managed so as to make possible the peaceful transfer of power from one party to the other. At the level of presidential elections, the party in power has been overturned by the party out of power nineteen times, almost once a decade. In the election of 1860, the political system broke down, and the Civil War, the worst disaster in American history, resulted.

　　Our history justifies our confidence in the system but also shows that it is not foolproof.

　　The second major party is able to survive a defeat because the statistical tendency that exaggerates the victory of the winning party operates even more strongly in favor of the second party against the third, fourth, and fifth parties. As a result, the defeated major party is able to maintain a monopoly of the opposition. The advantage of the second party over the third is so great that it is the only party that is likely to be able to overturn the party in power. It is able, therefore, to attract the support of everyone seriously opposed to the party in power. The second party is important as long as it can monopolize the movement to overthrow the party in power, because it is certain to come into power sooner or later.

　　Another consequence of the two-party system is that whereas minor parties are likely to identify themselves with special interests or special programs and thus take extreme positions, the major parties are so large that they tend to be moderate. Evidence of the moderation of the major parties is that much business is conducted across party lines. What happens when the Democrats control one house of Congress and the Republicans control the other? About the same volume of legislation is passed as when one party controls both houses, although some important legislation is likely to be blocked temporarily. It is possible to carry on the work of the government even when party control is divided because party differences are not fundamental.

　　美国的两党制

　　现在生活在美国的人没人能记起*党和共和党之间的竞争是什么时候开始的。这种竞争进行了一个多世纪，是世界上最早的政治竞争之一。

　　美国的政治体制是两党制的典型范例。当我们说美国有两党制时，并不是指美国只有两个政党。通常约有十几个政党提名总统候选人。我们之所以称之为两党制，是因为有两个大党派和许多小党派。通常小党派合在一起在全国选举是得票低于全国所投票数的5%。

　　在美国社会里，*党和共和党是和最有竞争力的组织。他们通过维持两党制，很轻松地组织选民。因为通常没有其他选择，美国人几乎无可避免地成为*党员或共和党员。此外，因为这些党的竞争历史很久，多数美国人知道自己属于两党中的哪一派。作为两大党占优势的结果，多数当选官员不是共和党员就是*党员。在过去的100年里，每年的总统选举中都进行了一些打破旧体制的尝试，但这种体制经受住了所有的攻击继续存在。

　　两党制是如何能如此坚实地扎根于美国政治中的呢?答案可能就在选举的运作方式中。美国不同于政府议会制国家，我们不仅选举总统，而且还选举许多官员，他们大约有80万人。国会议员也是从每区一票的选举中选出的。例如：我们从435个选区选举435名参议员，每一个选区选举一名参议员。从统计学上来讲，这种选举对大党派有利。选举制度使大党轻而易举地保持着他们的统治地位，因为他们赢得的席位可能比他们应得的份额多。

　　这种制度的结果就是它自动地产生了多数党。因为只有两个竞争者参加竞选，几乎可以肯定其中一个将赢得多数。而且，这种制度似乎有些夸大获胜党的胜利。虽然并不总是如此。但是产生多数党的巨大倾向在这种制度中形成了。在200多年的宪法史中，美国人对两党制的运作方法已经有很多了解，以使政权能够和平地从一个政党移交到另一个政党。在总统选举中，执政党已被在野党击败了19次，几乎每十年一次。在1860年的选举中，这种政治制度中断了，结果导致了南北战争――美国历的灾难。历史证明我们有理由对这一制度保持信心，但历史也表明这一制度不是万无一失的。

　　第二大党能在失败下继续生存，是因为在统计上夸大获胜党的获胜，这能够更有力地支持第二大党对第三、第四、第五党派的对抗。因此，失败的大党能够保持在反对派中的垄断。第二大党相对于第三党派有巨大的优势，它是可能击败执政党的党派，从而能够吸引强烈反对执政党的每一个党派的支持。只要第二大党能够垄断击败执政党的运动，它就是重要的，因为迟早它肯定能上台执政。

　　两党制的另一个结果是：鉴于小党派可能把自己与特殊的利益和特殊的纲领认同为一，因而有可能采取极端立场，而大党很强大所以倾向于温和。大党温和倾向的证据是许多事务都是超越党派界限进行。当*党控制国会的一个院而共和党控制另一个院时，会发生什么呢?像一个党控制国会两院一样，虽然一些重要法规可能被搁置，大约相同卷册的法规会得到批准。由于党派的分歧不是根本的，即使在两个党控制不同部门时，政府工作仍然能够进行。

【篇三】

Aging in European Countries

　　We have to realise how old, how very old, we are. Nations are classified as "aged" when they have 7 per cent or more of their people aged 65 or above, and by about 1970 every one of the advanced countries had become like this. Of the really ancient societies, with over 13 per cent above 65, all are in Northwestern Europe. At the beginning of the 1980's East Germany had 15.6 per cent, Austria,

　　Sweden, West Germany and France had 13.4 per cent or above, and England and Wales 13.3 per cent. Scotland had 12.3 per cent. Northern Ireland 10.8 percent and the United States 9.9 per cent. We know that we are getting even older, and that the nearer a society approximates to zero population growth, the older its population is likely to be - at least, for any future that concerns us now.

　　To these now familiar facts a number of further facts may be added, some of them only recently recognised. There is the apparent paradox that the effective cause of the high proportion of the old is births rather than deaths. There is the economic principle that the dependency ratio - the degree to which those who cannot earn depend for a living on those who can - is more advantageous in older societies like ours than in the younger societies of the developing world, because lots of dependent babies are more of a liability than numbers of the inactive aged. There is the appreciation of the salient historical truth that the aging or advanced societies has been a sudden change.

　　If "revolution" is a rapid resettlement of the social structure, and if the age composition of the society counts as a very important aspect of that social structure, then there has been a social revolution in European and particularly Western European society within the lifetime of everyone over 50. Taken together, these things have implications which are only beginning to be acknowledged. These facts and circumstances were well to the fore earlier this year at a world gathering about aging as a challenge to science and to policy, held at Vichy in France.

　　There is often resistance to the idea that it is because the birthrate fell earlier in Western and Northwestern Europe than elsewhere, rather than because of any change in the death rate, that we have grown so old. But this is what elementary demography makes clear. Long life is altering our society, of course, but in experiential terms. We have among us a very much greater experience of continued living than any society that has ever preceded us anywhere, and this will continue. But too much of that lengthened experience, even in the wealthy West, will be experience of poverty and neglect, unless we do something about it .

　　If you are now in your thirties, you ought to be aware that you can expect to live nearly one third of the rest of your life after the age of 60. The older you are now, of course, the greater this proportion will be, and greater still if you are a woman. Expectation of life is a slippery figure, very easy to get wrong at the highest ages. At Vichy the demographers were telling each other that their estimates of how many old there would be and how long they will live in countries like England and Wales are due for revision upwards.

　　欧洲国家的老龄化

　　我们不得不认识到我们多大岁数了，有多老了。当有7%或更多的65岁或65岁以上的人时，这些国家就被列为"老龄化"国家。到大约1970年，每一个发展国家就成了这样的国家。65岁以上的人超过13%的真正的老年人社会，都在西北欧。20世纪80年代初，东德有15.6%的人超过65岁，在奥地利、瑞典、西德和法国，这个比率为13.4%或更高，英格兰和威尔士有13.3%，苏格兰有12.3%，北爱尔兰有10.8%，美国有9.9%。我们知道人类在日益变老，人口增长率接近于零的社会离我们越近，人口越可能呈老龄化的趋势，至少就与影响我们的未来来说是这样的。

　　更多的现实，这其中有些只是近来才认识到，可能会加入到这些熟悉的现实中。有这样一个明显的似是而非的论点：造成老年人比率高的实际原因是出生人数而不是死亡人数。有一条经济原则：抚养率――不能自食其力的人依靠能挣钱养家的人的程度――在我们这样的更为老龄化的社会里比在发展中世界的较年轻社会里要有利一些，因为大量的无法独立的孩子与一定数的丧失工作能力的老年人相比，更是个负担。有对这样一个明显的历史真实的正确评价：先进社会的老龄化一直以来都是一种突变。

　　如果"革命"是对社会结构的迅速重建，如果社会的年龄构成被看作社会结构的一个非常重要的方面，那么在欧洲，特别是每一个人的寿命超过50岁的西欧，已经有一场革命。综上所述，人们只是刚刚开始认识到这意味着什么。这些事实和情况早些时候在法国维希举行的一个世界大会上被视为科学家和政策的挑战而置于显著的地位。

　　我们人口的老龄化，是因为在西欧和西北欧出生率比其他地方下降得早，百不是因为死亡率发生了一些变化。对这一观点经常有人不以为然，但这是通过基本的人口统计学澄清的事实。当然，长寿正改变着我们的社会，但这只是经验论。我们之中有一种比先于我们的任何社会多得多的继续生存的经历，这种经历将继续下去。除非我们能在这方面采取措施，即使在富裕的西方，太多的这种经历将被，视为贫穷和荒废的过去。你现年三十几岁，你应当知道，你可以指望在活到60 岁以后再活上差不多15年。现在你年纪越大，这个比例就越高。如果你是女性，这个比例还会更大。预期寿命不是一个固定数字，在年龄上很容易弄错。在维希，人口学家互相转告，在像英格兰和威尔士这些国家，他们对将有多少老人和他们能活多久的估计应向上调整。

【篇四】

Children's Self-esteem

　　Self-esteem is what people think about themselves - whether or not they feel valued - and when family members have self-respect, pride, and belief in themselves, this high self-esteem makes it possible to cope with the everyday problems or growing up.

　　Successful parenting begins by communicating to children that they belong, and are loved for no other reason than just because they exist.

　　Through touch and tone of voice parents tell their infants whether or not they are valued, special, and loved, and it is these messages that form the basis of the child's self-esteem. When children grow up with love and are made to feel lovable despite their mistakes and failures, they are able to interact with others in a responsible, honest, and loving way. A healthy self-esteem is a resource for coping when difficulties arise, making it easier to see a problem as temporary, manageable, and something from which the individual can emerge.

　　If, however, children grow up without hove and without feelings of self-worth, they feel unlovable and worthless and expect to be cheated, taken advantage of, and looked down upon by others.

　　Ultimately their actions invite this treatment, and their self-defeating behavior turns expectations into reality. They do not have the personal resources to handle everyday problems in a healthy way, and life may be viewed as just one crisis after another. Without a healthy self-esteem they may cope by acting out problems rather than talking them out or by withdrawing and remaining indifferent toward themselves and others.

　　These individuals grow up to live isolated, lonely lives, lacking the ability to give the love that they have never received.

　　Self-esteem is a kind of energy, and when it is high, people feel like they can handle anything. It is what one feels when special things are happening or everything is going great. A word of praise, a smile, a good grade on a report card, or doing something that creates pride within oneself can create this energy. When feelings about the self have been threatened and self-esteem is low, everything becomes more of an effort. It is difficult to hear, see, or think clearly, and others seem rude, inconsiderate, and rough. The problem is not with others, it is with the self, but often it is not until energies are back to normal that the real problem is recognized.

　　Children need help understanding that their self-esteem and the self-esteem of those they interact with have a direct effect on each other. For example, a little girl comes home from school and says, " I need lovings'cause my feelings got hurt today." The mother responds to her child's need to be held and loved. If instead the mother said she was too busy to hold the little girl, the outcome would have been different.

　　The infant's self-esteem is totally dependent on family members, and it is not until about the time the child enters school that outside forces contribute to feelings about the self. A child must also learn that a major resource for a healthy self-esteem comes for within. Some parents raise their children to depend on external rather than internal reinforcement through practices such as paying for good grades on report cards or exchanging special privileges for good behavior. The child learns to rely on others to maintain a high self-esteem and is not prepared to live in a world in which desirable behavior does not automatically produce a tangible reward such as a smile, money, or special privileges.

　　Maintaining a healthy self-esteem is challenge that continues throughout life. One family found that they could help each other identify positive attitudes. One evening during an electric storm the family gathered around the kitchen table, and each person wrote down two things that they liked about each family member. These pieces of paper were folded and given to the appropriate person, who one by one opened their special messages. The father later commented, "It was quite an experience, opening each little piece of paper and reading the message. I still have those gifts, and when I've had a really bad day, I read through them and I always come away feeling better."

　　The foundation of a healthy family depends on the ability of the parents to communicate messages of love, trust, and self-worth to each child. This is the basis on which self-esteem is built, and as the child grows, self-esteem changes from a collection of other's feelings to become personal feelings about the self. Ultimately a person's self-esteem is reflected in the way he or she interacts with others.

　　孩子们的自尊心

　　自尊是人们对自己的看法――他们是否感到受到重视――当家庭成员有了自尊、自豪、自信时，这种高度的自尊使人们有可能妥善处理孩子们成长的日常问题。

　　成功的育儿之道是第一步是让孩子们知道，他们上家庭的一份子，他们受宠爱的原因就是因为他们自身的存在。通过抚摸和声音的语调，父母告诉他们的幼儿他们是否受到重视、是否很特别、是否被爱。正是这些信息形成了孩子自尊的基础。当孩子们在爱的关怀下成长，不管他们是错误或失败，都使他们感觉到讨人喜爱时，他们就能用可依赖的、诚实的和爱的方式与别人交往。当出现困难时，他们就能用可依赖的、诚实的和爱的方式与别人交往。当出现困难时，健康的自尊心是一种解决困难的手段，使之容易把问题看作是暂的，能处理的，个人可以从中解脱出来。

　　然而，如果孩子们盛开在没有爱、没有自我价值感的氛围当中，他们感到不讨人喜欢、没有价值，料想可能被别人欺骗、利用和看不起。他们的行为最终导致了这种结果，他们的自我挫败的行为把预想变成了现实。他们没有以健康的方式处理日常问题的个人对策，生活在他们看来是一个又一个危机。由于没有健康的自尊心，他们在处理问题时，不是提出问题，而是用行动把问题表现出来，或是采取退缩以及对自己和他人保持冷漠的态度。这些人长大以后过着与世隔绝的孤独生活，缺乏给予爱的能力，这种爱他们也从未得到过。

　　自尊心是一种能量。自尊心强的时，人们感觉好像能够处理任何事情。这就是当特殊事情发生或一切进行得很顺利时一个人的感觉。一句赞扬的话、一个微笑、成绩报告卡上的一个好分数，或者做王码电脑公司软件中心些使自己引以自豪有事，都能产生这种能量。当自我感觉受到威胁，自尊心不足时，任何事在更大程度上都变成了一种需要费力去做的负担。很难听清楚、看清楚、想清楚，其他人都似乎没有礼貌、不体谅人、粗暴。问题并不在别人，是在自己。但常常直到恢复到正常的精神状态，人们才认识到真正的问题所在。

　　孩子们需要帮助为理解，他们的自尊和与他们交往的人的自尊彼此相互影响。例如：一个小女孩从学校回家说："我需要爱抚，因为今天我的感情受到伤害了。"妈妈应回应她的孩子对被爱抚和被爱的需要。如果反之，妈妈说她太心不能爱抚这个小女孩子，结果就不同了。

　　婴幼儿的自尊完全依赖家庭成员。直到孩子上学时，外界的力量才对孩子的自我感觉产生影响。孩子必须明白健康的首尊主要来自内部一些父母在实践中培养他们的孩子依靠外部因素而不是内部强化。例如，孩子的成绩单上有好成绩就可以得到奖赏，或者他们有了好的行为就给他们一些优待。孩子们学会了依靠别人来保持高度的自尊，却对现实世界的生活没有丝毫准备，因为在现实世界中，令人满意的行为并不会自动带来实在的奖励，如微笑、金钱或特权。

　　保持健康的自尊心是持续一生的挑战。一个家庭发现他们可以互相帮助，确定积极的态度。一个电闪雷鸣的晚上，一家人围坐在厨房桌子周围，每个人写下两件他们关于每一个家庭成员的事。这些纸折叠起来给了相应的人，他们一个接一个打开他们的特殊讯息。父亲后来评论说："打开每张字条看上面写的东西，那真是很好的感受。我依然保存着那些礼貌，当我遇到一个特别糟糕的日子时，看看它们，我总会从中解脱出来，感觉好多了。"健康家庭的基础是靠父母传达给每一个孩子爱、自尊心从别人的感受变为自我的感受。最终，一个人的自尊心就反映在他与别人交往的方式上。

本文来源：https://www.wddqw.com/HlTX.html