Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The Electoral College is a process that has been used in the United States Government for many years. It is the process that selects a candidate for Presidency based on electoral votes rather than the popular vote of the people. Many believe that the Electoral College should be abolished, but if we were to take it out of our governmental system, it would take away most of the effectivenss of our elections. The United States election process has worked very efficiently for many years with this process of election, it is very effective for choosing a candidate, and when it comes down to it, the last process of the Electoral College (House of Representatives stepping in when there is a tie) is very unbiased and is also effective in choosing a candidate. If we were to abolish the Electoral College, the United States government would basically be starting over with their election process, which isn't necessarily a good idea once you are nearly 300 years into being an official country.

The United States' election process has worked very effectively with the Electoral College for a large amount of years. There is no reason why it should be abolished from the country. Throughout all of these elections, the best candidate was chosen for each presidency in the end because of this great process of election. Rather than choosing the majority of the people, which could have a biased opinion, it is left up to both the citizens and a vote in Congress. This forms a balance between the two opinions. It is a very evenly based system, as said in Source #3 "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our deprised methos of choosing the President", the article states that "The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal." This means that just by having one region of the United States really respect you and vote for you, this does not mean you are going to win the election. No region can get you the win. There simply are not enough electoral votes. Therefore, you must cover the most ground possible in the United States, because the more states you win over, the better your chances of becoming president are.

The Electoral College is a very efficient process of election. Instead of only the people voting and the decision of who becomes president left to the popular vote, the power of selection for presidency is evenly spread between Congress and the people. Some say that the electoral colleg is unfair, and that it is irrational. This is stated in the article "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" written by Bradford Plumer. He states "The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality." This means Plumer believes that those who argue in favor of the electoral college do not take a look at the reality of things when talking about this subject. The electoral college is very fair when it comes to the election of a president, because we all want to choose the best candidate for the job, and the only way to do that is to have an effective system for choosing a candidate without having a biased opinion tossed into the mix to mess up the process. It's sort of like a job interview. You show what you have to offer to the boss (in this case it is the whole country), and if you are chosen for the job that means you were the most qualified and that you are the best choice for the job. Whichever candidate gets chosen for the job was obviously the best candidate at the time, and there is nothing that anyone can do to change that.

The one situation that most people worry about within the electoral college is when there is a tie in the electoral vote. In this situation, the decision of the election would be placed into the hands of the House of Representatives and the Senate chooses the Vice-Presidential candidate best suited for the job. It does not matter how many representatives there are for any one state, as stated in the article "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer. He states that "Because each state casts only one vote, the single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, representing 35 million voters." This means that no state has more power than another in this process, and every representative has the same amount of power when it comes down to chooosing a candidate best suited for being president. Additionally, it creates a sense of balance between all of the states and nobody has an unfair advantage when electing the next president.

As you can see, the electoral college is a very effective process used in the United States to choose a presidential candidate that should not be abolished from the country. With this system, the country has functioned very effectively for  a very long time, the system is very effective for choosing a candidate best suited for the presidential position, and it is very unbiased and fair when it comes down to the decision of the House of Representatives for the election. Abolishing this efficient process would just do a disservice to the country's election process, and I highly doubt that any whole-hearted citizen of the United States of America would want to do that to his or her own home country.

Score: 6