Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In d

Essay topics:

Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

The median voter theorem predicts that opposing parties will posit themselves towards the middle of the political platform in order to try to entice each opponent’s voters. The result is that often their proposals will look much more alike than if they really pursued the political ideologies of their parties. Is this the right strategy to follow? Should politicians pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals? Though I agree that pursuing elusive ideals is not the best strategy neither for the politicians themselves who will be constantly seen as equivocating u...

*** The full content of this essay is available to VIP readers

Votes
Average: 10 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-02-09 evanlu 66 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user gre13 :

Comments

Sentence: Nevertheless, I cannot fully agree with the statement in the prompt to the extent that always pursuing common ground and reasonable consensus is likely to destruct the primarily goal of doing politics, which is to offer to voters to choose among different ideologies and see these set into practice by the elected politicians.
Description: The fragment the primarily goal is rare
Suggestion: Possible agreement error: Replace primarily with adjective

Sentence: I think the two options offered in the statement are an invidious comparison.
Error: invidious Suggestion: insidious

flaws:
No. of Words: 599 350 (less words wanted in real exams)
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.277 0.35
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.046 0.07

It is on top list:
http://www.testbig.com/essay-categories/gmatgre

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 6.0 out of 6
Category: Excellent Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 599 350
No. of Characters: 3160 1500
No. of Different Words: 283 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.947 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.275 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.798 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 252 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 179 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 124 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 90 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.038 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.822 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.308 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.277 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.413 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.046 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5