Anything But Grand: A Response to Hart’s “Assessing Campaign Quality: Was the 2016 Election a Travesty?”

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPresidential Studies Quarterly
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Public Administration

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Anything But Grand: A Response to Hart’s “Assessing Campaign Quality: Was the 2016 Election a Travesty?”'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this