Rate the following argument fragment on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Evidence: According to source one, "What Is The Electoral College?", each political party has it's own set of electors that equal the amount of congressional delegates per state. Usually each state has a "winner-take-all" method, so the presidential candidate that gets majority in your state will get all of the electors that represent their party, not just most of them. This is beneficicial to the outcome of the election becuase it makes the ability for a candiate to get majority vote much simpler. There is less of a possibility of a tie, or an outcome where no candidate wins. Source 3, "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep out despised method of choosing president", states that "even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state..." , therefore allowing the candidate to secure all votes to their side, instead of having the votes divided on the line of majority rule, and causing rifts between Electoral College voters.

Score: 2