Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The founding father's wanted a good amount of power to the people so the president wont have full control over the country. With the electoral collage in act it will give less power to the people, gives more power to the electors, and the disaster factor.

The electoral collage gives less power to the people. This is true because the people have to vote for a elector instead of the president himself. People may get confuse on who is voteing for who. Ultimately the only types of votes that actually matter end up being the electors votes. Sometimes "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please. This makes the peoples votes almost worthless.

Electoral collage gives more power to the electors. The founding father wanted to give power to all the people; not small groups of them. Stae legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. This means the electors have the vote not the people. When the actual people vote they basically fliped a coin hopeing that some person they don't know voted for the right guy. The electors vote is what matters; not the peoples.

The single best argument against the electoral collage is what we might call the disastor factor. The 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse. State legislatures pick the electors, and these electors can disregaurd the people's votes and pick who ever they want. Back in 1960, segregationists in the louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy.

The electoral collage system is a bad idea because it gives less power to the people, gives more to the electors, and it is a disaster factor.

Score: 4