The advice given by the consultant is well meaning, perhaps to help calm the nerves of the politician. However, his or her argument is founded on tenuous assumptions and is rife with logical flaws which we will explore in details as follows.
Firstly, the validity of the consultant's argument is dependant on us taking his or her quoted figures on face value. Is the proclaimed number of 200 renters accurate? We would need to know where and how the consultants number were gathered. If it is shown that there was a political bias in masking the actual number of people who showed up at the protest, then the validity of the argument is seriously undermined.
Secondly, the flaw the the political consultant makes is the unstated assumption that the 19,800 people's inaction, in this case participation in a live protest, equates to them being fine with the elimination of rent control in the city. Participating in a public protest is usually the loudest and most direct form of protest, but it is not the only method of protest. Most of the people of the city might prefer to voice their disagreement with the elimination of rent control via other mediums, such as in newspaper articles or online writings.
Also, the political consultant acknowledges the fact that it was raining during the protest. If the quoted figure of 200 protestors is accurate, this could help explain why the turnout for the protest was so poor. It is reasonable that due to adverse weather condition, people were not keen about the idea of protesting in the rain. Or perhaps most of the people in the city consists of elderly people who simply couldn't go out in the rain to voice their disagreement due to health and safety concerns.
As it stands, the consultant's argument is weak and to bolster his or her claim that the elimination of rent control is not a problem, the consultant could perhaps conduct a survey with the 20,000 renters in the city. Unless the survey results show that the majority of people are in agreement with the elimination of rent control, claiming that the elimination is not a problem based on the turnout of the crowd is clearly a stretch.
In conclusion, the consultant's argument is based on weak line of reasonings and flawed assumptions. Unless he or she supports the conclusion with solid evidences, it is unlikely that his or her claim will encourage the politician.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 36, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
The advice given by the consultant is well meaning, perhaps to help calm the nerves of the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 30, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'consultants'' or 'consultant's'?
Suggestion: consultants'; consultant's
...ollows. Firstly, the validity of the consultants argument is dependant on us taking his ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 54, Rule ID: DEPENDENT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'dependent' on?
Suggestion: dependent
...validity of the consultants argument is dependant on us taking his or her quoted figures ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 20, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ously undermined. Secondly, the flaw the the political consultant makes is the unsta...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 20, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ously undermined. Secondly, the flaw the the political consultant makes is the unsta...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 414, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...y consists of elderly people who simply couldnt go out in the rain to voice their disag...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 19, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'consultants'' or 'consultant's'?
Suggestion: consultants'; consultant's
...d safety concerns. As it stands, the consultants argument is weak and to bolster his or ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'consultants'' or 'consultant's'?
Suggestion: consultants'; consultant's
...learly a stretch. In conclusion, the consultants argument is based on weak line of reaso...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'well', 'in conclusion', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.236486486486 0.25644967241 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.146396396396 0.15541462614 94% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0765765765766 0.0836205057962 92% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0472972972973 0.0520304965353 91% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0495495495495 0.0272364105082 182% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.146396396396 0.125424944231 117% => OK
Participles: 0.0337837837838 0.0416121511921 81% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.75590761271 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.018018018018 0.026700313972 67% => OK
Particles: 0.00225225225225 0.001811407834 124% => OK
Determiners: 0.130630630631 0.113004496875 116% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0135135135135 0.0255425247493 53% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0135135135135 0.0127820249294 106% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2388.0 2731.13054187 87% => OK
No of words: 410.0 446.07635468 92% => OK
Chars per words: 5.8243902439 6.12365571057 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.351219512195 0.378187486979 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.268292682927 0.287650121315 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.182926829268 0.208842608468 88% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.117073170732 0.135150697306 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75590761271 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 207.018472906 94% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475609756098 0.469332199767 101% => OK
Word variations: 51.6528900616 52.1807786196 99% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 20.039408867 85% => OK
Sentence length: 24.1176470588 23.2022227129 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9555067468 57.7814097925 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.470588235 141.986410481 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1176470588 23.2022227129 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.764705882353 0.724660767414 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 3.58251231527 223% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 50.9469153515 51.9672348444 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.71296296296 1.8405768891 93% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.562670502955 0.441005458295 128% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.159957236238 0.135418324435 118% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0957096976998 0.0829849096947 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.677528176601 0.58762219726 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.122986668996 0.147661913831 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.269783791274 0.193483328276 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104946267563 0.0970749176394 108% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.534692335089 0.42659136922 125% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0799617040037 0.0774707102158 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.380318363493 0.312017818177 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.079262070598 0.0698173142475 114% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.87684729064 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 5.0 6.46551724138 77% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 13.0 14.657635468 89% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.