Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The time of the founding fathers is long gone. Times have changed which means we have to change our way of thinking. Our way of voting. The Electoral Colege needs to be replaced by popular vote elections because the Electoral College discourages people from voting for their prefered president, influences future presidents to ignore some states, and does not clearly reflect the views of the American people.

Initially, by keeping the Electoral College individuals are less incentivised to vote if they know there is little chance it will do anything. "Voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election" (Source 3, 23). However, by implimenting popular vote, many more people will want to vote knowing that even if their side does not get the majority vote in the state, it still counts for something. Also, from that same source it says "The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College methos is not democratic in a modern sense." (Source 2, 15). So one would have to ask if the source is even reliable if it contradicts itself. In addition, even if they usually vote "candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the 'swing' states." (Scource 2, 13). This shows that states with more electoral votes will have more power over the people. Clearly, the Electoral College is a problem and popular vote is a much better way to vote.

Furthermore, because some states old more power than others wen it comes to elections, presidents often ignore the "smaller" states looking only for votes. For example, "During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad." (Source 2, 13). Candidates are not interested in the states, in the people, who do not give them enough votes. This is why the Electoral needs to be abolished and replaced with popular vote elections.

Moreover, just because a president wins the campaign, does not mean that the candidate won the people's votes, it only means that he won the Electoral College's votes. For example, in the 2000 election and the 1888 election, one party won even though majority of the votes went to the other. In the 2000 election, even though Gore had more popular votes than Bush, he still lost because he had fewer electoral votes. This shows that there is something broken in the system. Something that can't be changed and needs to be replaced. As you can see, popular votes are the way to go in such an important election like the presidential one with so much on the line.

In conclusion, the Electoral Colege needs to be replaced by popular vote elections because the Electoral College discourages people from voting for their prefered president, influences future presidents to ignore some states, and does not clearly reflect the views of the American people. The Electoral College might have been good in the past however, now it just complicated the process and is unfair.

Score: 5