You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy.
system
1.) What is the Electoral College' A electoral college is a process, not a place. I didn't know they had 538 electors. majority of 270 electoral votes. Representatives plus two for your Senators. . . . The Congressional delegation one of each memeber in the house. But i do think the District of Columbia. is each candidate running for President in your state has his or her own group of electors. Chosen a party political party, responsibilities. but what will happen if something happens to the congress what will go wrong? for the stuff that they be having partys for the policital paartys & stuff what do they do that for the things they have. like will the president be alright with this stuff that be going on but these things is good cause we will like the same things but idk know it that was alot of 538 electors but some of it will work. 2.) THe Indefensible Electoral College: Why Even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong' I understand what the American people is doing its a factor that some of yall got to learn thoe. Kennedy i don't understand his and they way he do like its alot for the candidate but for the other ones i dont know like what's up with the candidate and kenndey, the passage says .. In the same vein, "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please... oh, and what if the state sends two slates of electors to Congress? it happened in Hawaii in 1960. Vice President richard Nixon, who was presiding over the Senate, validated only his opponent's electors, but he made sure to do so "without establishing a precedent." what if that happend again? During the 200 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. If anyone has a good argument for putting the fate of the presidency in the hands of a few swing voters in Ohio, they have yet to make it. . . . Yes that's right they do have to make it to the candidate first they just can't walk up there first you got to be president by the pesident frist if you not by him or here then you messe dup for goood its not working out like that at all. it's official: the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it all mostly assertions in without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best. It's hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college! 3.) In 2012 election, for example, Obamma received 61.4 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and romney. . . . BEcause almkost all states award electoral votes on a winner -take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in astate creates a landslide electoral -vote victory in that state. A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes 538 is an even number, but it is highly unlikely. . . . The residents of each other regions are likely to be a successful presidents. The residents of other regions are likely to be feel disenfranchised- to feel that their votes do not count, that the new president will have no regard. Swing States' [2012's] election- to focus their campaign efforts on the toss-up states. . . . Big Staes' The popular vote was very close in Florida [in 2012]; nevertheless Obama, who won that vote got 29 electoral votes. A victory by the same margin in Wyoming would net the winner only 3 electoral votes. So, other things being equal, a large state gets more attention from presidentail candidates in a campaign than a small state does. . . . Avoid Run-Off Elections' Nixon in 1968 and Clintion in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes , while winning a majority in the Electoral College (301 and 370 electoral votes, respectively). There is presssure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority of the votes cast; that pressure, which would greatly complicate. . . . It can be argued that the electoral College method of selecting the president amy turn of potentail that is right because sometimes you really don't have that much of that stuff like that now but sometimes its hard to see stuff like that but you got to work on some things like that but not everything likec come on now. so candidates who do that some want. . . . But of course no voter's vote swings a naional election, and spite of that about one-half the eligible American population did vote in [2012's] election. 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. . . . Democrats in Texas, for example , or Republicans in California. Knowing their vote will have no effect , tghey have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by popular vote. . . .
user
Your evaluation score is: 0.0
assistant