Some people claim that the goal of politics should be the pursuit of an ideal. Others argue that the goal should be finding common ground and reaching reasonable consensus.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
In a country, there are several political parties. All of them do have their own opinions and policy for a wide scope of problems. Politics should aways strive for their ideals and the ideals of the people who vote for them. However, we have to keep in mind that often collaboration is needed to achieve ideals and sometimes collaboration asks a political party to adjust their opinions a bit.
Politicians have to do everything for their ideals because they get the trust of voters. Voters do have very clear reasons to vote for a certain politician. By voting for them, they also expect that a politician will fight for perspectives.
If politicians will find common grounds this result in a situation where nobody is fully satisfied. If a party gets a lot of votes, this party should have the possibility to realise their plans. By realising their plans they satisfied a lot of people.
Politicians are less motivated if they have to do a lot of work on subjects which not matched their opinion (completely). The result of this will be that problems are not tackled efficiently anymore. By having the ability to pursuit of a ideal politicians will work hard a the eager to realise plans will be big.
However, if there is a political system where there is no majority parties have to collaborate. Collaboration leads to adjustment of perspectives. However, to realise a perspective a bit different from the original plan is better than that there is no change at all. In addition, some problems do have multiple sides. In this case, it may be beneficial to go for reasonable consensus.
To summarise, politicians have to everything to achieve their ideals. However, in some cases with multiple sides consensus between many parties could be beneficial.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 242, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...politician will fight for perspectives. If politicians will find common grounds th...
^^^^
Line 6, column 235, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...re. By having the ability to pursuit of a ideal politicians will work hard a the ...
^
Line 6, column 243, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'politician'?
Suggestion: politician
...aving the ability to pursuit of a ideal politicians will work hard a the eager to realise p...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 270, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'a' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: a; the
...t of a ideal politicians will work hard a the eager to realise plans will be big. ...
^^^^^
Line 10, column 108, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'sides'' or 'side's'?
Suggestion: sides'; side's
...s. However, in some cases with multiple sides consensus between many parties could be...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, so, in addition, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 14.8657303371 20% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 58.6224719101 68% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1468.0 2235.4752809 66% => OK
No of words: 298.0 442.535393258 67% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92617449664 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.55969084622 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85360414547 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 215.323595506 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510067114094 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 477.0 704.065955056 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 23.0359550562 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.2690643637 60.3974514979 47% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 73.4 118.986275619 62% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.9 23.4991977007 63% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.7 5.21951772744 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.131300796661 0.243740707755 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0442465539191 0.0831039109588 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0411253516187 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0750173673427 0.150359130593 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0275054947135 0.0667264976115 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 14.1392134831 65% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 48.8420337079 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 12.1743820225 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.72 12.1639044944 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 100.480337079 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 11.2143820225 68% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: 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.