Too many students are proposing make an overview of the candidates and assess their competitiveness in some unspecified manner. While there are ways that this can be done well, I'm worried this might leads to rambling, disjointed commentaries. I don't want that. It would likely turn into the writer's personal feelings about this person and that person, which says nothing about their actual competitiveness.
The chore for this topic will be to find an interesting approach to the subject.
Some of the proposals so far have proposed the following:
- looking at where the money is coming from.
- comparing this stage of the election process with where we were in 2012.
- analyzing the dominant issues in the race so far.
- determining what criteria tends make the best candidates and whether that criteria also makes for the best presidents.
- comparing the strategies for winning the Republican nomination with that for winning the Democratic nomination.
Click on the label - 2016 election - to look through what I've posted so far. Scroll down to the e's and look through past stories on previous elections for more.
