Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Who do you vote for.? or what whould you do if there was no president?. well i think we can find out. But not to worry most states have a "winner-take-all"system. It's for giving awards to electors to the winning presidental canidate., But every canididate has its on electors & if u are becomeing the president then u have every 4 years then you have to be relected.

The Electoral College consists of 538 electors.,And a majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president.

But even so your state's entitled allotment of electors is equal to the numbers of its congressional delegation, for each member in the house of Representatives plus 2 for senators.

Each candidate running for president is your states has his or her own group of electors, But"Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral college.

You can help choose your state's electors when you vote for president because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors.

After the presidental election, your governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment". It lists all of the candidates who ran for president in your state along with the names of their respective electors.

The Certificate of Ascertainment also delcares the winning presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors will represent your state at the meeting of electors in december of the election year.

Under the electoral collage system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote, for (John) Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Demorcratic electors pledged to Kerry. On the off-chance that those electors won the state wide election.

But 34 electoral votes go to Congress and kerry whould get 34 electoral votes. But who are the electors., You might ask we will never know because it can be anyone not holding public office.

But back on the electoral college. The single best argument against the electoral college is what is call the disaster factor.

The american people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century;. The system allows for much worse.

Lets consider something, Consider that state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that thoes electors could always defy the will of the people. Back in 1960, segregationists in the louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors

Electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's canidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please

Oh, and its happend before a state send two slates of elsecotrs to Congress., It happend in hawaii in 1960. Luckily, Vice President Richard Nixon, who was presiding over the Senate, validated only his opponent's electors.

The Electoral college is widely regarded as an anachronism, A non democratic method of selecting a presdent that ought to be [overruled] by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner.

The advicates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense

Score: 2