Rate the following argument fragment on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Evidence: Here is a prime example, in the 2000 election Al Gore won the popular vote but because he had less electoral votes than Bush he unfourtunetly lost the election. According to Bradford Plumer "over 60% of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." It seems rather logical that if somebody gains the most votes in an election that the country would prefer that canidate to be the president. For that reason alone the reader should side with the idea to abolish the electoral college. Now besides somebody receiving more or less electoral votes, perhaps the candidates tied. In this case it gets thrown to the House Of Representitives which will cause a Wyoming Rep. with 500,000 voters to have just as much say as a California Rep. with 35,000,000 voters. All a tie would do is corrupt the voting system even more than it is. For those reasons there should be an indefinite ban on the electoral college.

Score: 2