BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

major political parties

Expert replies
by taposh_dr » Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:52 pm
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two
major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of
elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or
third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last
nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever
before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the
imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.
1. Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid
criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be
evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the
American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a
candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most
elections.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by money9111 » Mon Feb 15, 2010 6:48 pm
IMO B
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants

Join the discussion

by sars72 » Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:22 am
reports of imminent demise are premature coz 1. no ind or 3rd party has won election recently and 2. two major parties have spent more money than ever in support of cands and platforms
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
hmm.. seems to hold true since that is one of the premises used to support the conclusion.. looks weak, but is still technically correct, so i'm keeping this choice
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
nothing said about number of 3rd party candidates.. only winning the election is talked about. out of scope. eliminated!
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
blah blah blah.. out of scope! eliminated!
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
says who? eliminated!
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.
err.. not quite. though this is spoken about, the passage doesnt directly refute this.

--> A
Join the discussion

by money9111 » Tue Feb 16, 2010 9:37 am
taposh_dr can you post the answer?
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants

Join the discussion

by amazonviper » Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:51 pm
IMO A. PLease let us know the OA .
__________________________________

Winners never quit..Quitters never win !!
Join the discussion

by kevincanspain » Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:54 pm
The argument, in an effort to counter the notion that the the influence of the two parties is waning, mentions their
recent record fund-raising, relying on the assumption that money is a proxy for influence. If choice A is false, the argument is illogical.
Kevin Armstrong
GMAT Instructor
Gmatclasses
Madrid
Join the discussion

by paddle_sweep » Fri Apr 30, 2010 2:19 am
I narrowed it down to 'A' & 'E' and chose 'E'. What's the problem with 'E'?

Cheers
Join the discussion

by kaushals » Sat May 01, 2010 11:39 am
+1 for A
Join the discussion