The author suggests that the United States of America(USA) should dispense Electoral College, in his argument. At first glance the argument looks cogent, but on thorough scrutiny the argument fails to provide any facts or analogy to a similar proven observation. The argument is rife with fallacies. Many questions needs to be answered before the argument is accepted.
Firstly, the author does not provide evidence to support what other system can be successful in the USA. To accept the author's analogy that Electoral College is not an effective means choosing the President and the Vice President, the author needs to furnish results and observations about other ways of choosing leaders that have proven methodologies and proof of electing right leaders. Without providing such an evidence we can only assume taking the author's argument for his word which is completely absurd.
Moreover, the author fails to provide an effective analogy between the electoral vote and popularity vote. Before deciding on the correctness of the analogy the author needs to answer numerous questions, such as: How much do the popularity votes weight in an electoral voting scheme? What kind of people a vote for the popularity vote? How do the people surveyed represent the mix of the nations huge population effectively? Without answering these questions the author is shooting darts in the dark expecting at least a few of them to hit the target.
In addition, the author when considering the two states Maine and Nebraska only present a biased sample space for his observation. He does not mention what percentage of states are considered in his observation and what percentage do these two states represent. Without providing such evidence, we cannot clearly draw any conclusion of the the states that are based upon the winner-take-all system is present in "some" states, which is just obscuring our ability to draw conclusion further.
Finally, the author fails to provide a connection between disproportionate population and weight of votes in those states. Does he intend to say more population means more weight of the vote or vice versa? This is an open ended question and can be interpreted both ways. Such an equivocal approach only weaken the author's conclusion more.
To conclude, the author's conclusion that USA do away with Electoral College because it is unfair and undemocratic are baseless. Before making such claims he needs to provide suitable evidence to bolster his view.
- Sports stars and movie stars have an obligation to behave as role models for the young people who look up to them.in return for the millions of dollars that they are paid we should expect them to fulfill this societal responsibility. 58
- The following appeared in a memo from the Mayor of the city of Hillview:" In order to alleviate the serious unemployment problem in our town, we should encourage Autotech to build its automobile manufacturing plant in our area. The Hillview landfill, whic 66
- Teacher's salaries should be based on the academic performance of their students. 70
- "The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors: "Techcorporation is our top pick for investment this term. We urge all of our clients to invest in this new company. For the first time in ten years, a company that has developed satell 66
- Issue: So long as they are aware of the dangers involved, Adults should not be legally bound to use seat belts. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 120, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...be successful in the USA. To accept the authors analogy that Electoral College is not a...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 455, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... evidence we can only assume taking the authors argument for his word which is complete...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 337, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...e cannot clearly draw any conclusion of the the states that are based upon the winner-t...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 337, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...e cannot clearly draw any conclusion of the the states that are based upon the winner-t...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 315, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...h an equivocal approach only weaken the authors conclusion more. To conclude, the au...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 18, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rs conclusion more. To conclude, the authors conclusion that USA do away with Electo...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 129, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Before” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s unfair and undemocratic are baseless. Before making such claims he needs to provide ...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'look', 'moreover', 'so', 'at least', 'in addition', 'kind of', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.256818181818 0.25644967241 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.181818181818 0.15541462614 117% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0840909090909 0.0836205057962 101% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0386363636364 0.0520304965353 74% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0295454545455 0.0272364105082 108% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0977272727273 0.125424944231 78% => OK
Participles: 0.0477272727273 0.0416121511921 115% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.82239260203 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0340909090909 0.026700313972 128% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.122727272727 0.113004496875 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0113636363636 0.0255425247493 44% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.025 0.0127820249294 196% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2498.0 2731.13054187 91% => OK
No of words: 400.0 446.07635468 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.245 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.472135955 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.42 0.378187486979 111% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.315 0.287650121315 110% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.2175 0.208842608468 104% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.145 0.135150697306 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82239260203 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 207.018472906 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4925 0.469332199767 105% => OK
Word variations: 53.6241784229 52.1807786196 103% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0476190476 23.2022227129 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.5509239156 57.7814097925 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.952380952 141.986410481 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0476190476 23.2022227129 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.571428571429 0.724660767414 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 50.5476190476 51.9672348444 97% => OK
Elegance: 1.60909090909 1.8405768891 87% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.491490670944 0.441005458295 111% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.120549212415 0.135418324435 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0603925561681 0.0829849096947 73% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.583506981031 0.58762219726 99% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.108339290385 0.147661913831 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.182793542409 0.193483328276 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0949925355218 0.0970749176394 98% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.324320159053 0.42659136922 76% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.100317515581 0.0774707102158 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.295540946841 0.312017818177 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0634471518796 0.0698173142475 91% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.