Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Should we keep the Electorial College the way it is or change it to election by popular vote? Statistcs show that over 60 percent of voters vould prefer a direct election, rather than the kind we have now. Even with that being said, the electorial college still has its ''defenders''.

The Electorial college is made up of 538 electors, a majority of the 270 electorial votes is required to be elected to be President. Each state is allowes allotment of electors. One for each member in the house of representatives, with two each for Senators. Each canidata running for President is allowed their own group of electors, which are normally chosen by the candidate's political party. With that being said, state laws vary on how the electors are picked and what each of their responsibilitys are. Each Presidential election is held every four years, on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.

What is so wrong with the electorial college that 60 percent of voters would prefer to have a direct election? Well, under the electorial college system voters do not vote for the president, but vote instead for a slate of electors. Say you wanted to vote for a president who is Demographic, you would then vote for a slate of 34 demographic electors that pledged to that president. The electors are not allowed to be someone who is holding public office. With this being said, the voters cannot always control who their electors vote for.

In the ELectorial Colleges' deffence, its avoids the problem of elections where neither of the candidate's recieve a majority of the vote. It is very possible that the winner of the electorial vote may not wint the national popular vote, even though it happens very rarely it happened in 2000. Gore had more popular votes than Bush, but still fewer electorial votes, that was the first time since 1888. n

The thought of having to vote for the President of the United States, you actually get to pick who you want it to be. That would mean not only changing the constitution and having to come up with more rules and responsibilities, but allowing one to vote directly for who they want to become President. Wouldn't that be easier? Instead of having to come up with a electorial college and dealing with all of the risks, allowing citizens to pick for themselfs. I agree with the though of abolishing the electorial college, and so do 60 perecnt of voters. When a citizen votes on the electorial college itself, they have the chance of the college not pivking the President they would like to vote for.

With all of that being said, and the facts given right to you, it up to you to decide what you think is better for the United States. Either way, we still have to vote on a President every four years... with or without a Electorial College.

Score: 3