Apolitician running for office writes a book about her major accomplishments and charitable donations. what problem might a historian have when trying to use this book as a source for historical argument? a) the book is not old enough to be considered a reliable source b) the book is a primary source and cannot be credible c) the book is about charity rather than important political themes d) the book is likely to be biased in favor of the politician

D) The book is likely to be biased in favor of the politician.

Explanation:

What the politician will write in her book will be solely based on the good deeds done by her. She will make sure she will not include anything incriminating or anything that may jeopardize her future political aims. The book will be the extra helping hand for her to get the position.

Therefore, if a historian is to use this book as a source for historical argument, it will pose a big problem for it will only be able to provide just a one-sided story of the politician's life/ career. This book will only provide a tiny fragment of the politician's life, which will obviously be in her favor. So, using this book as a primary source won't do much, won't even be practical or give enough details.

a forgein bfvgrebdfkx

panamal canal treaty and iran hostage crisis hope this