Rate the following argument fragment on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Evidence: In 1960, a group of segretationists in the Louisiana legislature almost succeeded in removing electors who supported John F. Kennedy with those who opposed him. If this had happened, all of the states electoral votes would have been cast by biased electors, rather than by the actual voters themselves. In the same year, Hawaii sent two state electors to congress instead of one. It is sad that we maintain a system in our government that continues to let issues like this arise. Along with issues with the electors, why is it that the size of a state automatically gives it a bigger advantage in elections? Texas and California are the most two saught-after swing states in every election. Candidates will do everything they can to win over those electoral votes. But what about the little states? Many of the smaller states do not get visited by candidates. Some never even see campaign ads. This system we are using creates target areas in the United States that are more valuable in elections than others. This is in no way fair to the voters in smaller states, despite having the exact same rights as voters of bigger states.

Score: 2