Example collocations logo

Opponents in sentence

1082 examples of Opponents in a sentence

Moreover, the opponents argue, even the Fed does not buy bonds issued by troubled US states, such as California or Illinois.
But the decision not to prohibit indirect purchases, opponents argue, may have been intended to allow the ECB to carry out weekly repo operations, following a practice used by the Banque de France to reduce fluctuations in short-term interest rates.
After becoming overstretched in a series of unwinnable wars against much weaker – and yet irrepressible – opponents, the US was forced to turn inward.
In Brazil’s upcoming presidential election, both of the incumbent Dilma Rousseff’s main opponents are advocating policies that hark back to the good old days.
By contrast, opponents predict that the change will increase rates of marijuana use, and thus magnify the harm arising from that use.
Opponents of the legislation point to the resulting increase in the federal budget deficit, which will add $1.5 trillion to the government debt over the next ten years.
The problem with this saying is the paranoid mindset behind it, for it implies that the nature of Russian-US relations has not changed fundamentally since the Cold War’s end; that the animosities that exist between the two countries are those of two permanently implacable geopolitical opponents.
So globalization, like democracy, is vulnerable to itself, because it puts at its opponents’ disposal a set of tools that they can use to sabotage it.
Today's great powers have relied on similar methods, also heavy with rhetoric, against puny opponents, but with far less convincing results.
Contracts are not secure unless opponents of any current political leadership (as well as foreign firms) receive equal treatment under law.
Immigration opponents often point to the precipitous drop in the share of Europe’s population that identifies as Christian – from 66.3% in the early twentieth century to 25.9% in 2010– which they blame partly on the combination of high immigration from Muslim-majority countries and declining birth rates among native Europeans.
Of course, immigration opponents might argue that the threat to Europe is not so much a matter of official religion as of the values, cultivated in Europe’s Christian societies, that underpin liberal democratic institutions.
Citing retrograde cultural practices – from the subjugation of women to violence against religious and sexual minorities – in the autocratic and crisis-prone countries from which immigrants often hail, their opponents often argue that people from these cultures cannot assimilate properly in Europe.
After all, closing the borders to those in need is an extreme response – and one that runs counter to the Christian and European values immigration opponents claim to be defending.
Later, Gorbachev told me that he had been intentionally misinformed by opponents of reform who wanted Soviet troops in East Germany to intervene.
Both opponents and supporters of the bill concede that marriage has changed in various ways over time.
On the lexicographic point, opponents of same-sex marriage are surely right.
But there is a glaring weakness in the arguments of the bill’s opponents: while they hint darkly at the “unintended consequences” of legalizing same-sex marriage, they cannot spell out exactly what these consequences would be.
In fact, opponents of the bill fail to mention that traditional marriage is in a fairly advanced state of decay in Western societies.
Both the Bolsheviks and their opponents were involved in these falsifications, concealing, distorting, and concocting facts and circumstances, whether they referred to the real role of Stalin or Trotsky in the revolution or to the behavior of peasants and Cossacks.
Today, both "conservative democrats" and liberals advocate passing all the reforms needed to gain accession to the EU, while opponents include extreme nationalists, of both left and right, as well as some elements of the "secular" establishment.
Obama’s Republican opponents, who claim that fiscal stimulus cannot work, rely on arguments that are incoherent at best, and usually simply wrong, if not mendacious.
Otherwise, he tries to discredit or undermine opponents through relentless attacks.
Between issuing scurrilous charges of non-existent voter fraud, openly encouraging his fellow Republicans to engage in voter suppression, and inviting foreign powers to launch cyber attacks against his opponents, Trump has undermined the credibility of US elections.
Rousseff’s opponents want the protests to disrupt the games, damaging Brazil’s international image; some are even hoping for Brazil’s team to lose.
Despite repeated reminders from the EU, the Cuban government has done none of the things that the Union has been urging it to do for many years – above all, to release all political prisoners and stop the persecution of independent civil-society groups and the regime’s political opponents.
While President Bashar al-Assad’s regime remains vicious and tyrannical, and some of its opponents’ motives remain altruistic, the conflict can no longer be defined simply as one of good versus evil.
Republican candidates, running highly charged anti-Obama campaigns, trounced their opponents.
But, this time around, it is far less clear that it’s just an act, and that Trump would not really decide, in a fit of rage or frustration, to attack, or even nuke, his opponents.
Many Americans have perhaps grown desensitized to Trump’s off-the-wall tirades, having endured months of his late-night Twitter assaults on the press, his opponents and fellow Republicans, even his own cabinet members.
BackNext