Answer:
The claim in "should we establish the electoral college" is that the electoral college is a critical part of our democratic system that must be maintained. The author attempts to prove this claim by providing reasoning and evidence.
To evaluate the logic of the writer's reasoning, we need to consider if their arguments make sense. The writer argues that the electoral college ensures that smaller states have a voice in the presidential election. They claim that without the electoral college, candidates would focus only on densely populated areas, neglecting the needs of less populated states. This reasoning is logical because it acknowledges the potential imbalance of power between densely populated and less populated states.
Next, let's evaluate the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence the writer provides. The writer presents historical examples where candidates won the popular vote but lost the electoral college, highlighting the importance of the electoral college in determining the outcome of the election. Additionally, they mention the need for compromise during the formation of the Constitution, which led to the inclusion of the electoral college. These examples and historical context are relevant in supporting the claim.
Overall, the writer's reasoning is logical, and they provide relevant evidence to support their claim. The electoral college does ensure that smaller states have a voice and prevents candidates from solely focusing on densely populated areas. However, it is important to consider alternative perspectives and arguments against the electoral college, such as concerns about the winner-takes-all system and the potential for the popular vote to be disregarded. Understanding both sides of the debate can lead to a more comprehensive evaluation of the claim.
Step-by-step explanation: