Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
After a presidential election, citizens soon start to realize that their word doesn't matter. The Electoral College are the voters that mean more to the presidential candidates, and it is a disrespectful system to be the face of our ways of democracy. In these sources citizens and governors want to abolish this system of voting and deciding a blind fate for America. The people vote for the electors not the president, the electors elect the president not the people, and the possibility of the disaster factor happening on future elections. Popular vote doesn't seem to have much of a purpose anymore because the electors seem to be making the desicions in this country.

Starting off, the people of this country need to know on what they are voting on rather from what they thought they could of been voting on. The Office of the Federal Register state," You help choose your state's electors when you vote for president" (soure 1). They insist that we are basically voting for a possibility to get the candidate we want or to be betrayed and vote for the other party. Truly this means that this system is cheap and could backfire. Not only that but half or a little over half of citizens seem to take responsibility to vote, in that case it makes it harder to get the electoral votes to go in favor of popular votes. Our votes only exsist to help choose votes.

Asisting the first claim, our votes are unexistent. Richard A. Posner claims,"it is the electors who elect the president , not the people"

(source 3). Right of the bat the Constitution and it's preamble is disrespected by this system. The preamble says that we as citizens of this country are the voice of this land and would further on insist or choose what we want it to be known as. But, that can't necessarily happen if we don't vote. Posner also says " ( and that trust is rarely betrayed)" (source 3). Even though this is a fact there is still the possibility or the potential to be nailed or betrayed by the electors. If there is a possibility in something unfair to happen by law it should be taken down and changed for our safety. Yet this happened in 2000 , when W. Bush aquired more electoral votes than Gore but Gore had more popular votes. A plurality only has a chance to win electoral votes.

additionally, the system could supposively allow for much worse tricks and grief. Bradford Plumer describes "The single best argyment agaisnt the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor" (source 2). The disaster factor includes legislatures replacing the Democratic electors with new ones and this happened in the 2000 fiasco. This is were the popular votes and higher that the electoral votes given to the president. Knowing that the legislatures could succesfully replace or revise or votes into the opposing party. Voting campaigns seem to just be a game , the electors want to win so 17 sates didn't even have the chance to see the candidates at all. This is the system sudgested by our founding fathers and it is a mockery to let it stay and bring judgement to our votes.

It is humorous to and unfair to see the electoral college take over our votes. It seems that our votes are only seen as jokes. As if the whole preamble was a way to joke around with the citizens and give them hope. Many governors want to Abolish the electoral college, and most of us should take responsibility to vote for this and dismantle the electoral college from ever taking over our voice. The disaster factor, the way on how the electors decide, and how we vote for the electors not the president, are prime examples on how irrational this system is. The only way to get our voice back is to ablolish it and start over fresh with a new system in mind.

Score: 4