patanjali.purpose wrote:
I have some doubts about B/E - can anyone help:
B - this choice says 35% residents willing to CONSIDER ALTERNATE PLANS (note, its PLANS not PLAN)- does this mean they will support the plan to deport immigrants. They might even consider completely new plan, for example, ASKING THE IMMIGRANTS TO GO BACK ON THEIR OWN. In such case, argument may not be weakened (candidate supporting deporting plan may win). Can this be an correct WEKAN EXCEPT answer
E - 30% residents (immigrants) could be part of 35% people who support the plan. If so,argument may not be weakened (candidate supporting deporting plan may win). Can this be an correct WEKAN EXCEPT answer
Pls share your thoughts
The argument premise: 60% are opposed to the plan. 35% are in support of the plan
The conclusion: Since more residents oppose the plan,
the candidate who does NOT support the plan will win.
B: "Of the 35% of residents who support the plan, some are willing to consider alternate plans for addressing illegal immigration. "
If the ones who support the plan, consider an alternate plans:
a. If they support alternate plans, in which the immigrants go back as you suggested, the candidate who does not support might garner some more votes. He still wins. Hence this one doesn't weaken.
b. If the consider alternate plans, in which the opposed candidate doesn't garner any more votes, he still wins since 60% of people are still with him.
So overall, the 35% reconsidering works out either neutrally or in favor of the candidate who the argument predicts will win. Hence the conclusion stays the same. and this is a correct WEAKEN EXCEPT answer.
E: "Just under 30% of the city’s residents are illegal immigrants who cannot vote. "
If these almost 30% belong to the 60%, and they can't vote, the percentage of people opposing the deportation can possibly vote fall to just above 30%, which is less than the 35% who are in support of the deportation. This would essentially change the winning candidate from the opposing to supporting one. Hence the conclusion is weakened. So, this is not the correct answer.
Cheers!
