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.

Senator Strongwood_LSAT.

Expert replies
by gmat_perfect » Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:09 am
Senator Strongwood reported that, contrary to a study cited by the administration, a thorough study by his own party concluded that a reduction in the capital gains tax would lead to an increase in the federal deficit. "Hooray for common sense," he said. "Everyone knows that when you cut taxes you lose revenue." He concluded that the administration's plan for reducing the capital gains tax was now dead, because he could not imagine any senator voting to increase the deficit.

Which one of the following accurately describes something Senator Strongwood does in advancing his argument?

(A) He implies that increasing the capital gains tax would decrease the federal deficit.
(B) He assumes senators will believe his party's report instead of the administration's.
(C) He resorts to name-calling by expressly stating that his opponents lack common sense.
(D) He assumes that senators will rarely vote for unpopular legislation.
(E) He assumes that a study commissioned by his party must be more objective than one commissioned by the administration.

OA: Later
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by sk818020 » Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:08 pm
IMO B.

Not (A) because the passage does the opposite. It implies that reducing the capital gains tax will increase the deficit.
Not (C) because the passage does not expressly state that his opponents lack common sense. This may be indirectly advanced, but not expressly.
Not (D) because the passage does not tell us anything about unpopular legislation.
Not (E) because the passage does not tell us anything about the objectivity of either position.

B is true because of the statement, "because he could not imagine any senator voting to increase the deficit." If senators are voting to increase the deficit, then based on the argument they must believe Strongwoods study which says that increasing the capital gains tax leads to an increase the federal deficit.

What is the OA?

Thanks,

Jared
Last edited by sk818020 on Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion

by hardik.jadeja » Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:02 pm
Agree to the reasoning given above.. IMO B.
Join the discussion

by nikhilkatira » Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:11 am
gmat_perfect wrote:Senator Strongwood reported that, contrary to a study cited by the administration, a thorough study by his own party concluded that a reduction in the capital gains tax would lead to an increase in the federal deficit. "Hooray for common sense," he said. "Everyone knows that when you cut taxes you lose revenue." He concluded that the administration's plan for reducing the capital gains tax was now dead, because he could not imagine any senator voting to increase the deficit.

Which one of the following accurately describes something Senator Strongwood does in advancing his argument?

(A) He implies that increasing the capital gains tax would decrease the federal deficit.
(B) He assumes senators will believe his party's report instead of the administration's.
(C) He resorts to name-calling by expressly stating that his opponents lack common sense.
(D) He assumes that senators will rarely vote for unpopular legislation.
(E) He assumes that a study commissioned by his party must be more objective than one commissioned by the administration.

OA: Later
IMO B.

OA pls.
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Join the discussion

by Shawshank » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:11 am
IMO --B
No Doubts
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shawshank Redemtion -- Hope is still alive ...
Join the discussion