Without our two political parties cutting across economic and geographic interests democracy as we know it could never have been made to funtion. The author probably meant to suggest that

a) an important feature of u.s. political system is the broadly based appeal of the two political parties
b) each political party appeals to a different social class
c) only a two-party system can funtion in a democracy
d) political parties in the United States tend to represent sectional interests
e) there is no significant difference between the democratic and republican parties

i think is c

The author is saying that there are members of each of the political parties in all parts of the US and from all levels of economic society. Go back and recheck your answers for a better one.

To determine the correct answer, let's examine the given statement. The author states that "Without our two political parties cutting across economic and geographic interests, democracy as we know it could never have been made to function."

To find the correct interpretation, we need to consider the reasoning behind the author's argument. The author suggests that having two political parties with diverse interests is vital for the functioning of democracy.

Option (a) states that an important feature of the U.S. political system is the broadly based appeal of the two political parties. While this aligns with the author's statement, it is not explicitly mentioned, so we cannot conclude that this was the author's intended meaning.

Option (b) claims that each political party appeals to a different social class. This idea is not mentioned in the statement, so we cannot assume this was the author's intended meaning.

Option (c) suggests that only a two-party system can function in a democracy. This aligns with the statement, as the author emphasizes the importance of having two political parties. Therefore, this option is a possible interpretation.

Option (d) asserts that political parties in the United States tend to represent sectional interests. While this idea is important, it is not directly implied by the statement, so we cannot assume this was the author's intended meaning.

Option (e) states that there is no significant difference between the Democratic and Republican parties. This contradicts the author's argument, as the author emphasizes the importance of having diverse political parties. Therefore, this option is unlikely to be the correct interpretation.

Based on this analysis, option (c) - only a two-party system can function in a democracy - appears to be the most accurate interpretation of the author's intention. However, please note that interpreting the author's intended meaning can be subjective, and different individuals may have different perspectives.