Abstract
This essay responds to arguments made by Roderick P. Hart about how campaigns should be evaluated and argues that the 2016 election was not a fine campaign. It discusses the merits of “republican” criteria for evaluating campaign quality and contends that some of the new criteria proposed by Hart are useful insofar as they serve these republican ideals. The essay ends by arguing that even if scholars were to adopt Hart’s proposed standards for evaluating campaign quality, the 2016 campaign fell short of being grand.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
