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 a 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.
Some people think that the ideal politics situation could be reached by means of relentlessly Effort. Others people, however, argue that idealistic politics are not real and everyone in politics Must be live in real world. I agree with the latter statement and present the following reasons to support my point of view.
First of all, the win-win situation- it is a political situation which in one side takes benefits From another and Vice versa and not necessary due to the loss of another side- requires a Common ground to play a political satisfaction in it and provides needs of all members in Competence thoroughly, in exemplification of, the Iran nuclear deal with the p5+1 that known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action which in every side in the internationally convention Pursuit a common language for an appropriate deal speaking for everyone. Contrastingly, if those Countries would seek an idealistic target, I could not think this issue is not be solved till now. In Addition, not only the JSPA convention relies primarily upon the common ground policy, but also every international convention such as The Paris Climate Agreement (PCA), European Economy Community (EEC), and so forth require this point of view. Therefore, most politicians choice a Real method to cope with an international problem and to expanding a democracy among people and nations.
Second, the politicians’ idealistic thoughts make them aloof from politics home, for instance, the trump’s idealistic outlook, an American dream for United States’ people that he asserted in your elections campaign “more job-more welfare” forced the president for making money for your country with an amoral way such as selling guns, air fighters, tanks to un-developing country: Saudi Arabia, Emirates, turkey and so on. Since the ideal view is not meant in our diplomacy because of the world is not a utopia which it could be continued and develop ideal policy, ideal economic, ideal view to any sections. Furthermore, into the whole system, one part cannot work effectively alone and every part of a system need to working together perfectly; in this case, we should consider every aspect of politics, miscellaneous attitudes, other parts of society including economic, culture, sports, and etc. Thus, we cannot choose the ideal attitude to govern a country or a system due to it is not realistic.
In summary, I believe, we could pursue an ideal view where that is into computer democracy games and we have only one way to achieving a common place for playing a democracy for our people that is a sincere and transparent policy known as fine a commonplace to reaching a reasonable consensus. Therefore, I strongly support the consensus politics that proceeding in a real world.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 917, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
...ty including economic, culture, sports, and etc. Thus, we cannot choose the ideal attitu...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, second, so, therefore, thus, for instance, in addition, in summary, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2339.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 451.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18625277162 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95837165876 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558758314856 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 746.1 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 34.0 23.0359550562 148% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 139.316250852 60.3974514979 231% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 179.923076923 118.986275619 151% => OK
Words per sentence: 34.6923076923 23.4991977007 148% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6923076923 5.21951772744 205% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258406151784 0.243740707755 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876058267039 0.0831039109588 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0488892913929 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158765888913 0.150359130593 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.040623764238 0.0667264976115 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.4 14.1392134831 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.51 48.8420337079 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 12.1743820225 145% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.59 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.6 11.2143820225 139% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.