Comparative Politics Qualifying Examination

Comparative politics scholars disagree about what the ideal research program should entail. Some scholars argue in favor of deductive hypotheses and/or large N research designs relying on sophisticated statistical techniques that do not require much in-depth knowledge of a particular polity. Other scholars favor a more inductive approach and pursue more qualitative work using case study methods that require in-depth knowledge of one or a few particular cases. Still others advocate a tripartite approach combining formal modeling, statistics, and case studies. Your task is to evaluate these rival methodological approaches in comparative politics. What strengths and weaknesses of each approach? What are their weaknesses? What do you believe to be the ideal approach to Comparative Politics?