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.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 78, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ks about the mayoral elections in Town T ,how candidate Keating beat candidate Mil...
^^
Line 5, column 66, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a candidate'.
Suggestion: who is a candidate
...argument is that there is no mention of who candidate Miller is up against this year. He has ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 352, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'issues'' or 'issue's'?
Suggestion: issues'; issue's
...date X this year, and is unaware of the issues candidate X is tackling current issues ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, may, second, so, well, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2405.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 464.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18318965517 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64119157421 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78826258744 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42025862069 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 727.2 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0237431252 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.25 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.1 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.342071741856 0.218282227539 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13108525964 0.0743258471296 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0933614951025 0.0701772020484 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221201178871 0.128457276422 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0935566419427 0.0628817314937 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.67 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 78, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ks about the mayoral elections in Town T ,how candidate Keating beat candidate Mil...
^^
Line 5, column 66, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a candidate'.
Suggestion: who is a candidate
...argument is that there is no mention of who candidate Miller is up against this year. He has ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 352, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'issues'' or 'issue's'?
Suggestion: issues'; issue's
...date X this year, and is unaware of the issues candidate X is tackling current issues ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, may, second, so, well, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2405.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 464.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18318965517 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64119157421 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78826258744 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42025862069 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 727.2 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0237431252 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.25 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.1 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.342071741856 0.218282227539 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13108525964 0.0743258471296 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0933614951025 0.0701772020484 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221201178871 0.128457276422 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0935566419427 0.0628817314937 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.67 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.