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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Political scientist dilemma

Expert replies
by avenus » Wed May 27, 2009 9:50 am
Political scientist: One of the most interesting dilemmas in contemporary democratic politics concerns the regulation of political campaign spending. People certainly should be free, within broad limits, to spend their money as they choose. On the other hand, candidates who can vastly outspend all rivals have an unfair advantage in publicizing their platforms. Democratic governments have a strong obligation to ensure that all voices have an equal chance to be heard, but governments should not subsidize expensive campaigns for each candidate. The resolution of the dilemma, therefore, is clear: _______.

Which one of the following most logically completes the political scientist's argument?

(A) only candidates with significant campaign resources should bepermitted to run for public office
(B) an upper limit on the political campaign spending of each candidate is warranted
(C) government subsidization of all political campaigns at a low percentage of their total cost is warranted
(D) all wealthy persons should be prohibited from spending their own money on political campaigns
(E) each candidate should be allowed to spend as much money on a political campaign as any other candidate chooses to spend
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by mbadrew » Wed May 27, 2009 10:30 am
IMO B
Join the discussion

by Domnu » Wed May 27, 2009 11:27 am
IMO B.
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Join the discussion

by avenus » Wed May 27, 2009 2:38 pm
Domnu wrote:IMO B.
please elaborate

.
Join the discussion

by Domnu » Wed May 27, 2009 3:10 pm
avenus wrote:
Domnu wrote:IMO B.
please elaborate

.
Sorry about that :wink:

(A) only candidates with significant campaign resources should bepermitted to run for public office

This would violate the argument (people should be free, as they choose to spend money, etc.)

(C) government subsidization of all political campaigns at a low percentage of their total cost is warranted

Low percentage? What does this mean? If it's the same percentage for everybody and somebody has a campaign that costs $10^30 or something, then it's still an expensive subsidization.

(D) all wealthy persons should be prohibited from spending their own money on political campaigns

Against the "people should be free, as they choose to spend money" idea again.

(E) each candidate should be allowed to spend as much money on a political campaign as any other candidate chooses to spend

Again, against the "people should be free as they choose to spend money" idea.

From process of elimination, we end up with B. This works, because of the "broad limits" mentioned.
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Join the discussion

by avenus » Wed May 27, 2009 3:42 pm
Domnu wrote: From process of elimination, we end up with B. This works, because of the "broad limits" mentioned.
I agree you could get to B by POE, but I was a bit puzzled because B it's not a "complete" answer either. It doesn't address the other issue ensure that all voices have an equal chance to be heard and since the stimulus states The resolution of the dilemma, therefore, is clear in rather strong terms, I was a bit pissed off and not completely satisfied...

What do you think??

.
Join the discussion

Re: Political scientist dilemma

by ankit1383 » Wed May 27, 2009 6:38 pm
avenus wrote:Political scientist: One of the most interesting dilemmas in contemporary democratic politics concerns the regulation of political campaign spending.
dnt you think that choice B says just the same..........if we are cappping the maximum money that a campaigner can spend......it is just like regulating the spending..........
Join the discussion

by shalinisingh » Wed May 27, 2009 8:53 pm
answer B
Join the discussion

Re: Political scientist dilemma

by avenus » Thu May 28, 2009 12:15 am
ankit1383 wrote:
avenus wrote:Political scientist: One of the most interesting dilemmas in contemporary democratic politics concerns the regulation of political campaign spending.
dnt you think that choice B says just the same..........if we are cappping the maximum money that a campaigner can spend......it is just like regulating the spending..........
not really, there are many ways of regulating. A would be a way of regulating. same for D and E. That doesn't sound very convincing.
Join the discussion

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 3:03 pm
I feel the answer will be B
Join the discussion