In the last year’s mayoral election in Town T, candidate Miller led candidate Keating by a substantial margin in the polls leading up to the election. At the last minute, candidate Keating launched a widely viewed series of television advertisements that focused on preserving the natural environment of Town T, a topic neglected by candidate Miller. Subsequently, candidate Keating won the election by a narrow margin.
This year, if candidate Miller hopes to win the upcoming mayoral election, he must increase his coverage of the topic of preserving the natural environment of Town T.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In last year’s mayoral election in Town T, candidate Miller first led the polls in the election but at the last minute candidate Keating launched a widely viewed series of television advertisements that focused on preserving the natural environment of Town T and won the election. Here, the action taken by Keating to launch such a topic in market which is neglected by Miller and launching it widely at the last moment as his best sword which he kept to win over his opposition candidate in election teaches a lesson in itself that same can be done by Miller in this year election by launching an unexpected campaign regarding fresh agenda giving no time to the opposition to respond.
The agendas of Candidate Miller in last year’s election which led him in polls till the last moment can be reconsidered and put in front of people with the fresh campaign and innovative way of advertisement. He can expand his area of campaign by taking the advertisement to every media such as radio, television, newspaper, social- media and the like. Here, by connecting with different sources of media to the people, he can connect to every single person in his area and can keep his views more clearly in front of them.
Candidate Miller can also do door-to-door campaign in the town. So, that people can feel close connect with him. While campaigning he can ask people directly to give their opinion about what they wanted from the government and what are the main problems faced by them in the Town. For example any kind of sewage problem and water lodging problem in rainy season in the town and he can give an assurance to solve these problems when he will be in power by including them in his agenda. Additionally, he can also include the essential and common issues needed to be considered in the town such as maintenance of law and order or infrastructure development (such as building of roads, building of parks and others) of the town in his agenda.
However, in this year election candidate Miller not only increases his coverage of preservation of the natural environment of the Town T. In addition to it, he can also recreate and revive those natural elements of the town which are already lost or deteriorating, for example, river or sea-side of the town. He can encourage people to make clean and green town and tell its benefits as healthy natural environment can be a boost for tourism industry of the town. Many people will get jobs as new institutions will be opened up for recreational activities or sports such as river-rafting, surfing and swimming and the like. The money earned by increase in tourism of the town can be used for various kind of upliftment of the town. In addition to it, the revival of river will bring an increase in water resources for the town and together will make a healthy and safe environment for the people.
Miller can also encourage the people to use solar equipment and can include the point in his agenda of putting solar panels on the government buildings of the town which will preserve the environment at the same time saves money at long run and also gives clean energy. He can also encourage putting sewage treatment plants on releasing industrial waste from private firms and can also treat town’s waste before reaching into the rivers. He can also include of planting of a particular number of trees in his agenda.
Therefore, only increasing his coverage of the topic of preserving the natural environment of Town T will not be enough and doesn’t provide the fuller assurance of winning of the Candidate Miller. Hence, before starting the campaign for this year elections he needs to consider the above mentioned points and need to campaign harder and at the vast level and advertise innovatively connecting closely with the people of the town.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
flaws：
it is out of topic. This is not an issue essay.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 659 350
No. of Characters: 3092 1500
No. of Different Words: 275 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.067 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.692 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.627 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 213 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 147 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 107 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 32.95 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.699 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.85 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.384 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.627 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.284 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
In the given argument, the…
In the given argument, the author talks about the mayoral elections in Town T ,how candidate Keating beat candidate Miller by addressing the environment preservation issue which was ignored by candidate Miller. The author also states that if candidate Miller hopes to win the election this year, he should be addressing the environmental issues of Town T. This argument has many flaws since it talks about replicating last year’s strategy to get guaranteed results this year. There are a number of variables the author has not considered while making this argument.
Firstly, the author has said that candidate Miller should replicate candidate Keating’s strategy of addressing environmental isses this year to win the campaign. By the information provided here, we knoe for sure that environmental issues were definitely a concern for the residents of Town T last year. But we have no indication that it’s a concerning issue this year. And if it’s not, the idea of addressing environmental issues this year may backfire on candidate Miller. Candidate Miller must consider the pressing issues the residents of Town T have this year and address solving those.
The second flaw with the argument is that there is no mention of who candidate Miller is up against this year. He has learnt from the last election when Keating beat him, but Keating may not be contesting against candidate Miller at all this year. For example, if candidate Miller is up against some other candidate X this year, and is unaware of the issues candidate X is tackling current issues of the residents, he would stand to lose the elections this year as well. It is very much possible that after his campaign last year, Keating has worked on a number of solutions for the environmental concerns.
Lastly, the author has mentioned that last year Keating launched a campaign about environmental concerns and hence won the mayoral elections. But, there are no other mentions of any other campaigns or efforts Keating took which may have contributed to the outcome of the election. Were there multiple issues Keating took to solving which were pressing issues for his constituents? Or was there maybe a negative word of mouth campaign against Miller which presented Keating as the more favourable candidate among the residents of Town T? More clarification about the various variables and public sentiment are required to understand why exactly Keating won the first election.
In conclusion, this argument has a lot of missing information about the Town T, it’s issues and the various factors contributing to the outcome of their mayoral elections. The mention that simply replicating your opponent’s strategy which worked last year is deeply flawed as it indicates the conditions and concerns of Town T’s population is exactly the same which is untrue for any population.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 453, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'kept winning'.
Suggestion: kept winning
... last moment as his best sword which he kept to win over his opposition candidate in electi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 65, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , that” 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.
...o do door-to-door campaign in the town. So, that people can feel close connect with him....
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, therefore, while, for example, in addition, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 27.0 12.9520958084 208% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 31.0 11.1786427146 277% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 109.0 55.5748502994 196% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3178.0 2260.96107784 141% => OK
No of words: 658.0 441.139720559 149% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.82978723404 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.06473204393 4.56307096286 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70905768528 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 281.0 204.123752495 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.427051671733 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1005.3 705.55239521 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 31.0 22.8473053892 136% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 78.899315845 57.8364921388 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.333333333 119.503703932 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.3333333333 23.324526521 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61904761905 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250598338246 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.094875008822 0.0743258471296 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.147431131673 0.0701772020484 210% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164618356498 0.128457276422 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.159287279579 0.0628817314937 253% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.33 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 132.0 98.500998004 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.5 12.3882235529 222% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.1389221557 129% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.