In a political system with only two major parties, the : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 02 Dec 2016, 17:02

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# In a political system with only two major parties, the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 49 [5] , given: 0

In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 16:24
5
KUDOS
14
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

57% (02:35) correct 43% (01:43) wrong based on 1042 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most reliably inferred from it?

(A) If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
(B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
(C) A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
(D) The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2989
Followers: 60

Kudos [?]: 576 [9] , given: 210

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2008, 14:51
9
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Okay according to B

Votes are divided equally. Lets say there are 100 voters.

So

Now a candidate C enters the race. According to the passage C is likely to take over either A's votebank or B's vote bank. Lets say C takes over A's vote bank by 10%.

Now
A - 40
B - 50
C - 10

As you can see, neither of the three parties will get over 50% of the votes. This is the quintessential CR numbers trap. You have to dig deeper than the surface to find the actual answer.

cheers.
Director
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 758
Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 210 [4] , given: 8

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 23:00
4
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
sebycb976 wrote:
In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.
If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most reliably inferred from it?

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.

I go for B, since if before the 3rd party comes into the picture, there was a 50-50 split, the third party will only get voters from only one pool. So the 50-50 split will turn into a 50-(50-X)-X split. So B, and only B can be correctly inferred
Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 793
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 155 [2] , given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2008, 17:20
2
KUDOS
A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties. [ Not true – as per argument, the third party draws unequally – eliminate it]

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote. [true – Hold it]

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties. [this may be true – but since argument never discusses about new voters - eliminate it]

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties. [too extreme – eliminate it]

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties. [Not per argument – eliminate it]

CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2989
Followers: 60

Kudos [?]: 576 [1] , given: 210

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 23:54
1
KUDOS
Its clear B guys.

Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 90
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 40 [1] , given: 2

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2011, 18:15
1
KUDOS
+ 1 for B
_________________

Fight till you succeed like a gladiator..or doom your life which can be invincible

Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 947
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 17:22
Premise 1: In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. Premise 2: The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate.
Conclusion: Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Passage says third candidate affects one of the major parties candidate by drawing his/her voters, so it can be assumed that new voters who never voted might not vote from this third candidate.

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
The passage does not support that third party will have radical views.

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
This is again in contrary to premise 1. Because if third party is coalition of former leaders from both parties, then voters of both candidates should be affected.

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1286
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 400 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 18:02
Yes, i also agree with this.
abhijit_sen wrote:
Premise 1: In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. Premise 2: The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate.
Conclusion: Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Passage says third candidate affects one of the major parties candidate by drawing his/her voters, so it can be assumed that new voters who never voted might not vote from this third candidate.

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
The passage does not support that third party will have radical views.

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
This is again in contrary to premise 1. Because if third party is coalition of former leaders from both parties, then voters of both candidates should be affected.

Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 18:13
You guys are falling for the same trap I did...at least I'm not alone.
Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 225
Location: Pune
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 3

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 18:36
abhijit_sen wrote:
Premise 1: In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. Premise 2: The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate.
Conclusion: Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Passage says third candidate affects one of the major parties candidate by drawing his/her voters, so it can be assumed that new voters who never voted might not vote from this third candidate.

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
The passage does not support that third party will have radical views.

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
This is again in contrary to premise 1. Because if third party is coalition of former leaders from both parties, then voters of both candidates should be affected.

How can C be the infrence when it is written that "The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate" so i suppose it would have been a better infrence if it was written that new party will attract new canidates who have no voted for anone as this goes in line with the passage and is not explicitly stated in the passage...............
_________________

Every Problem Has a Sloution So keep working
AB

Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 947
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 19:37
sebycb976 wrote:
You guys are falling for the same trap I did...at least I'm not alone.

A blind following another blind and both falling in ditch does not make condition any better.
Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2008, 09:07
B is the OA although I am still not 100% clear I understand the reason.
Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2008, 15:41
Many thanks bsd, makes sense now
Intern
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 3

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2010, 05:16
For this relatively hard inference question, I used the process of elimination to get to the right answer.

a.) This is wrong because the 2nd sentence states that "The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate", therefore the third party would not draw equally from both parties.

b.) this is true, since there are only two political parties and voters were divided equally over the two parties. As a result, both parties will ofcourse capture only half a vote. Therefore, "neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote." Therefore, B is CORRECT.
the trick is that you need to read through a negative format which is not intuitive for most people or just me, haha.

c.) We never talk about new voters. Plus new voters can have ideas of whom they want to vote. For ex: if this voter came from TEXAS, very religious and conservatives family, then he/she is likely to go for Republican. She wouldn't be parties neutral.

d.) we only talk about voters distribution, but not political parties stance, so this answer choice is out of scope

e.) We never talk about founders of both parties. Therefore this one is out.
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 591
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 652 [0], given: 20

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2010, 04:35
A. Whether there is a compromise or not, part C (3rd party) will ALWAYS draw membership from only one of the other party (A or B). WRONG
B. Before formation of party, if A and B had equal voters, then of the parties less one candidate will be fewer than 50; at best 51: 49 CORRECT
C. We are not told what effect, if any, the number of those who refuse to vote for either A or B will have on party C... Out of scope and it is WRONG
_________________

KUDOS me if you feel my contribution has helped you.

SVP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1558
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 558 [0], given: 6

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jun 2010, 19:07
B for me too.
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 299
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 7

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2011, 05:44
That was tricky. But I did get B by POE. Here's how.

(A) If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
The question mentions that the 3rd party will get its votes from only one of the two parties.

(B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
This remains. So B.

(C) A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Words such as 'will not' or 'never voted' seem too strong. Eliminate.
(D) The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
Political stance? Not important. Eliminate

(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
_________________

If you like my post, consider giving me KUDOS!

Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 177
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 13

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2011, 05:44
B
Manager
Status: Married
Affiliations: MENSA India
Joined: 30 Apr 2011
Posts: 102
Location: India
GMAT 1: 630 Q42 V35
GMAT 2: 640 Q42 V35
GMAT 3: 640 Q44 V32
GMAT 4: 660 Q47 V34
GMAT 5: 680 Q46 V37
GPA: 3.6
WE: Sales (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 13

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2011, 07:17
Very clear explanation hanumayamma...Went for C too, as per your reasoning...
_________________

Always aim at the moon. Never mind if you miss, you will fall in the stars

Intern
Joined: 02 Nov 2010
Posts: 41
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 23

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2011, 09:18
Also went with B. Tough question B was the only answer that I felt made any sense.
Re: CR - Political Parties   [#permalink] 21 Jun 2011, 09:18

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 37 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 In a political system with only two major parties, the 7 19 Dec 2010, 19:08
In a political system with only two major parties, the 3 04 Jul 2010, 08:44
In a political system with only two major parties, the 4 21 Jul 2009, 02:09
2 In a political system with only two major parties, the 11 27 Jun 2009, 06:59
In a political system with only two major parties, the 3 01 Aug 2008, 08:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by