Question

1. how did tyler’s view of the annexation of texas differ from van buren’s position? tyler opposed texas annexation, while van buren tried to annex it in 1837 tyler wanted immediate annexation, while van buren argued that texas should first have territory status tyler saw texas as a slave state, while van buren wanted it annexed as a free state tyler wanted texas to be annexed, while van buren opposed it

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze the historical views on Texas annexation:

• John Tyler supported Texas annexation (he pushed for it to expand slavery - friendly territory).
• Martin Van Buren opposed Texas annexation, mainly due to concerns about upsetting the balance between free and slave states and potential diplomatic issues with Mexico.

Now we evaluate the options:

• Option 1: Incorrect. Tyler supported, Van Buren opposed, not the other way around.
• Option 2: Incorrect. Van Buren opposed annexation, he didn't argue for territory status first.
• Option 3: Incorrect. Van Buren opposed annexation, he didn't want it as a free state (the main issue was annexation's impact on the slave - free balance, not the state's status as free or slave during annexation push).
• Option 4: Correct. It matches Tyler's support for annexation and Van Buren's opposition.

Answer:

D. Tyler wanted Texas to be annexed, while Van Buren opposed it (assuming the last option is labeled D; if the original options have different labels, adjust the label but keep the text: "Tyler wanted Texas to be annexed, while Van Buren opposed it")