Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Ah, the electoral college. Don't you just

LOVE

how irrelevent, unfair, and confusing it is? In fact, it is so without flaw, that in 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote, but he lost the presidency (Source 2). Some people say that the electoral college is an anachronism, but some people disagree. Those people are wrong. The electoral college was irritating in the 1960's, and it's irritating now. You should side with Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and the Chamber of Commerce (Source 2), and abolish the electoral college.

First, and most importantly, the electoral college is unfair to voters . Most states in the electoral college is based on a "winner take all" system; if the candidate gets the majority of votes in that state, that candidate gets the electors (Source 1). This means most candidates focus in on the states they know that they have a chance of winning, and focus on going after "swing states" (Source 2).  If a candidate was to get the majority in Texas, Florida, and California, the three biggest swing states, the candidate would have 122 electoral votes, almost half of the 270 votes necessary to win (Sources 1 and 3). Voters for the electoral college say that people in the swing states are going to pay closer attention to the campaign and become more thoughtful voters (Source 3),  but should 10% of the nation decide who runs your country?!

The second virus causing the electoral college to convulse and bite its tongue in half is what happens in the event of a tie. If this is to occurr, then state delegates in the House of Represenatatives decide the President (Source 2). Each state only casts one vote, so the representative from Rhode Island would have just as much to say as the 55 representatives from the state of California (Source 1 and 2). Not only that, but a majority of people vote one party for president and another for Congress (Source 3). There are 538 possible votes in the electoral college (Source 1), so it isn't impossible for a tie to happen. In 1976, if 5,559 voters from Ohio and 3,687 voters in Hawaii had switched candidates, there would have been a tie (Source 2).

And finally, the last thing that makes the electoral college as relevant as a new wheel for your horse and buggy is that, it's mind-bogglingly confusing. The electoral college is run by humans, so we must account for human error. The electors are just people chosen by the candidate who don't hold a seat in government (Sources 1 and 2). In 1960, a group of racists in Louisiana almost replaced Democratic electors with ones who would oppose John F. Kennedy, and he would have lost the election (Source 2). In Hawaii, also in 1960, two slates of electors were sent (Source 3). Faithless electors have refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for anyone else (Source 2).

In conclusion, the electoral college is literally pointless. It's unfair and confusing. If America had decided on a majority rules electoral system, and not this pile of trash, we would still have all the same presidents we did before. Well, except Al Gore.

Score: 5