Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The Electorial College is something in the United States that needs to be replaced. It is an irrational system that takes the people's power to vote away from them. The system has flaws that leave the possibility of disaster open to happen. It takes the power to choose the goverment officials from the people, and gives it to a group of people who can vote either way. Why would we keep this?

The Electorial College is a way to choose the Presidential canidate who wins the election. It involves a slate of electors (according to Source 2) who cast their votes in. The people in each state vote for the winning electors of that state. The electors pledge to a canidate and thats what people vote for. Once the people choose a winning elector group they go to Congress and cast their votes in for who they want, and that person then gets so many votes. The problem is that the electors aren't required to vote for who they said they would, so if the elector suddenly decided to change his mind after he or she won, the people's votes are basically invalidated and a different elector gets the votes. This effectively removes the people from the equation in who gets elected. All an elector would have to do is win over the people, then he or she could just change their minds and cast a different vote than what they said they were going to do. The people who vote don't even vote for the Presidential canidate in this system, they vote for a bunch of electors that they hope will vote for what they said.

This is not an irrational, unrealized fear. It has actually happened before. According to Source 3, in the 2000 election, Al Gore had a majority of popular votes, but less electorial votes, so he lost to Bush. This isn't even the first time it has happened, it has happened previous times throughout U.S. history. This is a clear example of how flawwed the Electorial College system. Between the possibility of the people's votes not counting for anything, and that they don't even actually vote for their preffered canidate, this system needs to be replaced.

Some may argue that the chance of an elector not casting his or her vote that he pledged to is very slim. Why would you even be ok with taking such a chance? It's better to be one-hundred percent sure of what will happen instead of ninety-five percent. Also, since most states in the U.S. award electorial votes by a winner-takes-all basis (according to Source 3), if one side of the votes wins, even by a slim margin, they get all the votes. This seems unfair, since if they won by a slim margin at least some of the state thinks it should be a different vote. It would make more sense if the states awarded both sides of the vote if it was a close win for one side or the other, but they would award the true winner with more votes than the narrow loser.

Another problem with the E.C. system is that states that are largely of one belief ( Republican or Democrat ect. ) have no real reason to pay attention to the opposite side of the canidacy. Since the state would be largely one thing or the other, it is irrelivant if thirty percent of the state votes one way if seventy percent of the state votes the other, since the landslide victory style of electorial vote giving is present in most states. This also means that states that are biased and small states get almost no exposure from the opposite side of the canidacy because they know they have almost no chance of winning their votes. This seems to force the voters to choose one canidate's electors because they don't know enough about the other.

In conclusion, the Electorial College needs to be replaced with a more fair, balanced system. It has the potential to allow the electors to defy the will of the people who voted them in, invalidating the people's votes and making them pointless. It also has candates only focusing their ads and visits on the states with more votes and the states biased towards their party. Finally, it has almost all the states have a landslide "winner-takes_all" style of awarding electorial votes. This means if one side of electors only wins by a slim margin, the other side gets nothing, even though since they lost by a small number they clearly have a sizeable amount of voters for them. The Electorial College needs to be removed before someone takes advantage of it's serious flaws and takes the votes of the people and makes them useless.

Score: 5