Let's argue just to argue - Top Premier Essays

Absolutely no plagiarism, must be original and very thorough. Please make sure everything is followed in the question and the grading rubric. Assigned articles is attached but also must include at least 1 other academic relevant outside resource, total of at least 2 references. Must include in-text citations. Please include the free link to the relevant academic source.

Supporting material: Please feel free to use these links…Must also include one other academic relevant outside resource.

SUPREME COURT.(2010).CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION. WASHINGTON D.C. RETRIEVED FROM HTTP://WWW.SUPREMECOURT.GOV/OPINIONS/09PDF/08-205.PDF*PLEASE READ THE MAJORITY OPINION IN CASE BEGINNING ON PAGE 66 IF YOU ARE ASSIGNED TO ARGUE FOR THE DECISION OF THE COURT. IF YOU ARE ASSIGNED TO ARGUE AGAINST THE DECISION – REFER TO THE DISSENTING OPINIONS THAT BEGIN ON PAGE 88 OR 178.

Yang, T., & Zhao, S. (2012). CEO duality, competition, and firm performance. Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2177403

Ferracone, R. (March, 2014). Combined chairman/CEO roles: Easier than you think. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/robinferracone/2014/03/05/combined-chairmanceo-roles-easier-than-you-think/

QUESTION:LET’S ARGUE FOR ARGUMENT SAKE!

If your last name begins with A – M: Present an argument against the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Be sure to support your argument with specific examples.

PLEASE SEE GRADING RUBRIC BELOW. THIS ASSIGNMENT SHOULD BE AT LEAST 3-4 PARAGRAPHS LONG AND VERY THOROUGH. MAKE SURE YOU INTEGRATE REAL-LIFE APPLICATIONS TO SUPPORT KEY POINTS.

Case Discussion Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Quality of Initial Posting

40.0 pts

Initial response displays an excellent understanding of the assigned case, the course readings, and the underlying concepts and includes the correct use of relevant terminology. Initial response additionally integrates specific real-life application (current events, work or personal experience, prior coursework, etc.) and/or other peer-reviewed research to support key points. Initial response is clear, concise, and compelling.

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Quality of Replies to Classmates

35.0 pts

Replies to classmate’s display understanding and analysis of the professor’s and classmates’ posts and extend the discussion in a meaningful manner either by extending the analysis of the case or by including outside research relevant to the discussion (please do not include updated case information).

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Mechanics