Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Editorial in Golbindian Newspaper: For almost three months, [#permalink]
31 Jan 2007, 06:08
70% (02:08) correct
30% (00:55) wrong based on 11 sessions
Editorial in Golbindian Newspaper: For almost three months, opposition parties have been mounting daily street demonstrations in the capital in an effort to pressure the ruling party into calling an election. Though the demonstrations were well attended at first, attendance has declined steadily in recent weeks.
However, the decline in attendance does not indicate that popular support for the oppositionâ€™s demands is dropping, since
A. the oppositionâ€™s demands have not changed during the period when the
street demonstrations have been mounted.
B. No foreign governments have expressed any support for the oppositionâ€™s demands.
C. The state-controlled media have ceased any mention of the demonstrations, leaving many citizens outside the capital with no way of knowing that demonstrations continue.
D. There have not recently been any antigovernment demonstrations in cities other than the capital.
E. A recent sharp decrease in unemployment has led to increased popular
support for the government.
Re: Editorial in Golbindian Newspaper: For almost three months, [#permalink]
31 Aug 2012, 14:15
please can an expert explain this
I was thinking E
it looks for a reason to show that the attendance decline does not mean decline in support
if a decrease in unemployment implies people have started getting jobs so they are busy working and cannot attend does not mean that people now dont show intrest
so it should be E
can anyone explain a general streagtegy for solving these problems
It helps to first classify the question type. I'd call this an "explain the discrepancy".
The quick summary is that the size of the demonstrations has been decreasing, but we're trying to explain why this might not mean a drop in public support for the opposition.
Be careful not to mix the two groups – there are the demonstrators themselves and then there is the public (meaning everyone in the country). If (E) is true, then yes, you are correct, some demonstrators might now have jobs and that could explain whey there are fewer demonstrators on the street. But notice what (E) says about the public: the decrease in unemployment "has led to increased popular support for the government."
We wanted to argue that support for the demonstrators had not declined, but if more people support the government then surely it has!
The decline in unemployment alone may help resolve the discrepancy, but if it's accompanied by an increase in support for the government that actually makes the discrepancy worse.
Mark Sullivan | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Seattle, WA