The recently announced dissolution of the Freedom Party, a major national political party, will not benefit the one other major national political party, the Liberty Party. It will, however, help third parties, including the Workers Party, who will now take more votes away from the Liberty Party in the upcoming national presidential race than would have been taken by the Freedom Party, had it not been dissolved.
Which of the following, if true, would cast the most serious doubt on the claim made in the last sentence above?
a. Name recognition is a better predictor of a political party's success than how well its positions match with public opinion.
b. Most voters had considered the Freedom Party and the Liberty Party to have very similar positions on most key issues.
c. The Workers Party only runs political candidates in local elections, including those for city council members, assemblymen, and mayors.
d. Polls indicate that most voters believe that candidates for third parties are more honest and trustworthy than are candidates for major national parties.
e. The dissolution of a major political party inevitably causes many voters to change their long-standing voting habits and vote for parties they have never voted for in the past.
OA is C n my answer is B.
OA talks about particular party whereas I chose answer that is surely enough to undermine the argument because with no Freedom party, most voters would vote for Labour Party as both parties have similar stands on many issues.
Can anyone help in this?
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Voter's choice
This topic has expert replies
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
[email protected]
- Elite Legendary Member
- Posts: 10392
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
- Thanked: 2867 times
- Followed by:511 members
- GMAT Score:800
Hi siddhu161,
Many CR prompts present very specific ideas/limitations (and wording) that you have to spot in order to answer the question correctly. By missing the specific wording, you might be tempted to choose one of the wrong answers.
The Facts:
-2 major national parties: Freedom Party (recently dissolute) and Liberty Party
-There are other third parties (including the Workers Party)
The Conclusion:
The dissolution of the Freedom Party won't help the Liberty Party in the UPCOMING NATIONAL PRESIDENTIAL RACE; it will help the third parties though, because those third parties will take more votes away from the Liberty Party than the Freedom Party could have.
The Logic:
The effect of the Freedom Party's dissolution is discussed ONLY in terms of the UPCOMING NATIONAL PRESIDENTIAL RACE. Since the third parties are supposedly going to benefit significantly from this action, we have to assume that the third parties are actually in the PRESIDENTIAL RACE. As a secondary assumption, we'd have to assume that something the Freedom Party was doing had a "limiting effect" on what the third parties could do against the Liberty Party.
We're asked to Weaken the logic behind the prompt. The easiest part of the logic to attack is the "presidential race", since it's mentioned specifically as the area of benefit.
Answer C points out a great reason WHY the third parties won't actually benefit: [spoiler]The Workers Party runs candidates in local elections ONLY, so there's no party candidate in the National Presidential Election.[/spoiler].
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Many CR prompts present very specific ideas/limitations (and wording) that you have to spot in order to answer the question correctly. By missing the specific wording, you might be tempted to choose one of the wrong answers.
The Facts:
-2 major national parties: Freedom Party (recently dissolute) and Liberty Party
-There are other third parties (including the Workers Party)
The Conclusion:
The dissolution of the Freedom Party won't help the Liberty Party in the UPCOMING NATIONAL PRESIDENTIAL RACE; it will help the third parties though, because those third parties will take more votes away from the Liberty Party than the Freedom Party could have.
The Logic:
The effect of the Freedom Party's dissolution is discussed ONLY in terms of the UPCOMING NATIONAL PRESIDENTIAL RACE. Since the third parties are supposedly going to benefit significantly from this action, we have to assume that the third parties are actually in the PRESIDENTIAL RACE. As a secondary assumption, we'd have to assume that something the Freedom Party was doing had a "limiting effect" on what the third parties could do against the Liberty Party.
We're asked to Weaken the logic behind the prompt. The easiest part of the logic to attack is the "presidential race", since it's mentioned specifically as the area of benefit.
Answer C points out a great reason WHY the third parties won't actually benefit: [spoiler]The Workers Party runs candidates in local elections ONLY, so there's no party candidate in the National Presidential Election.[/spoiler].
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
-
[email protected]
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:02 am
- Thanked: 3 times
- Followed by:4 members
Hey Rich!
We are NOT supposed to SECONDARY ASSUME! We should work only on the data presented above!
Am I wrong?
Regards,
Mukherjee
We are NOT supposed to SECONDARY ASSUME! We should work only on the data presented above!
Am I wrong?
Regards,
Mukherjee
