Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Nov 2014, 09:24

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2012
Posts: 129
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 95 [0], given: 2

Reviews Badge
In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 10 Nov 2012, 10:20
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

95% (01:54) correct 5% (00:00) wrong based on 32 sessions
In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between the ages of 18 and 25 voted. In the 2004 local election, however, candidates made more of an effort to appeal to these younger voters, so turnout was slightly higher at 39%.

Which of the following pieces of information weakens the above argument?

A. The candidates for city council were ages 55, 72, and 64.
B. The turnout among voters between the ages of 35 and 44 was 42% in 2004.
C. Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004.
D. The polls stayed open later on Election Day in 2000.
E. In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot.
_________________

Push +1 kudos button please, if you like my post

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 299
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 107 [0], given: 32

Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 10 Nov 2012, 10:31
kingb wrote:
In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between the ages of 18 and 25 voted. In the 2004 local election, however, candidates made more of an effort to appeal to these younger voters, so turnout was slightly higher at 39%.

Which of the following pieces of information weakens the above argument?

A. The candidates for city council were ages 55, 72, and 64.
B. The turnout among voters between the ages of 35 and 44 was 42% in 2004.
C. Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004.
D. The polls stayed open later on Election Day in 2000.
E. In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot.


Answer has to E.

Turnout was slightly higher at 39% because candidates made more effort.
typical Cause and effect scenario.
So we can weaken by showing the mentioned cause was not the actual cause, as showed by answer choice E.
If these 18 yr olds tuned out for voting because of other reasons ( to vote for a referendum lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol) and not because of candidates's efforts then the argument is weakened.

OA pls.
Booth Thread Master
User avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1942
Concentration: Finance
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 3.5
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 231 [0], given: 343

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 11 Oct 2013, 09:08
kingb wrote:
In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between the ages of 18 and 25 voted. In the 2004 local election, however, candidates made more of an effort to appeal to these younger voters, so turnout was slightly higher at 39%.

Which of the following pieces of information weakens the above argument?

A. The candidates for city council were ages 55, 72, and 64.
B. The turnout among voters between the ages of 35 and 44 was 42% in 2004.
C. Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004.
D. The polls stayed open later on Election Day in 2000.
E. In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot.


Agree with (E), they were not more appealed by the candidates but they wanted to vote for the referendum for lowering the age to buy alcohol legally
So this weakens it. For weaken questions, always keep an eye on other possible explanations/circumstances that could also explain some event.

Hope it helps
Let us know the OA please :)
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 2

Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 12 Oct 2013, 19:57
Agreed with others.

Question asks, "Which answer weakens this argument: 'Voter turnout was higher specifically because candidates targeted youth'."

A. The candidates for city council were ages 55, 72, and 64.
- Incorrect: irrelevant. Even if candidates were 19, 22, and 26, one cannot be sure that age had any bearing on voter turnout (simply because it wasn't mentioned in the argument).

B. The turnout among voters between the ages of 35 and 44 was 42% in 2004.
- Incorrect: irrelevant. We're concerned about the voter turnout of those between 18 and 25. Even if this was true, it wouldn't weaken the argument.

C. Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004.
- Incorrect: irrelevant. This may be true, but we know that in general, the voter turnout for those aged 18 to 25 increased between 2000 and 2004.

D. The polls stayed open later on Election Day in 2000.
- Incorrect: irrelevant. The argument wants to prove that targeting youth caused an increase in voter turnout, not times the polls closed.

E. In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot.
- Correct: The topic of the referendum is irrelevant (and maybe stereotypical!), although the age mentioned is key (this referendum would affect the exact age group candidates were targeting). This poses a serious question: did voter turnout increase because of the referendum, or because candidates targeted youth? This casts doubt on the argument's conclusion, therefore, we can be sure that E weakens the argument.
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 214
GPA: 3.46
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 89 [1] , given: 164

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 13 Oct 2013, 05:16
1
This post received
KUDOS
IMO C

For me I was stuck between C & E.

C says that "Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004". Even though it doesn't represent the general % increase for the age-group 18 to 25, it weakens the argument that the candidate made efforts to make the youngsters in the age-group vote in 2004 election, resulting into increase in the 2004 election votes for the age-group 18-25. There might be other reasons for the increase to 39%.

E says that "In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot". This actually means that candidates made an effort of bringing referendum to encourage the age-group 18 to 25 to vote in 2004 election. Therefore, this option seems to actually strengthen the argument.

Experts please help in answering this question as your inputs will help in attacking such questions irrespective of the correct answer.

Thanks.
1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [1] , given: 2

Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 13 Oct 2013, 07:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
I'm no expert, but I hope you don't mind me sharing my thoughts!

mba1382 wrote:
IMO C
C says that "Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004". Even though it doesn't represent the general % increase for the age-group 18 to 25, it weakens the argument that the candidate made efforts to make the youngsters in the age-group vote in 2004 election, resulting into increase in the 2004 election votes for the age-group 18-25. There might be other reasons for the increase to 39%.


Let's put it this way:

Argument: Number of ballots cast by youth in 2000 was 220/500, but was 232/500 in 2004 -- therefore, voter turnout increased.

A - E: different groups aged 18 - 25

2000
A: 25
B: 40
C: 25
D: 40
E: 90
Voter turnout: 44%

2004
A: 5
B: 47
C: 35
D: 45
E: 100
Voter turnout: 46.4%


Despite Group A, voter turnout is still higher in 2004. Had the question stated: "... candidates made more of an effort to appeal to these younger voters all individual groups, so turnout was slightly higher at 39%", perhaps C could have been a more viable answer... yet still, B) voter turnout increased, and supposedly, it's because A) candidates appealed to younger voters -- in other words, A caused B. So, your reasoning is absolutely correct when you state, "There might be other reasons for the increase to 39%"; we must show that A may not have caused B -- and answer C does not show this.

__________

mba1382 wrote:
IMO C
E says that "In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot". This actually means that candidates made an effort of bringing referendum to encourage the age-group 18 to 25 to vote in 2004 election. Therefore, this option seems to actually strengthen the argument.


Your reasoning is correct, except that the argument does not state that candidates put the referendum on the ballot to attract youth. The argument states that during the local election, candidates increased youth voter turnout by appealing to them. How they did so is not mentioned, so we cannot assume that their strategy was to use the referendum. So, if E were true, we ask: "Did candidates successfully increase voter turnout because they targeted youth?", our answer would be: "Well, this is possible, but it is also likely that the youth turnout increased because they wanted to vote on the referendum." In other words, A or C caused B. Therefore, we cannot conclude indefinitely that A caused B.
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 214
GPA: 3.46
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 89 [1] , given: 164

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between [#permalink] New post 13 Oct 2013, 07:36
1
This post received
KUDOS
Thanks. Really appreciate your reasoning. :-)....

sammervash wrote:
I'm no expert, but I hope you don't mind me sharing my thoughts!

mba1382 wrote:
IMO C
C says that "Turnout among African-Americans between 18 and 25 decreased from 2000 to 2004". Even though it doesn't represent the general % increase for the age-group 18 to 25, it weakens the argument that the candidate made efforts to make the youngsters in the age-group vote in 2004 election, resulting into increase in the 2004 election votes for the age-group 18-25. There might be other reasons for the increase to 39%.


Let's put it this way:

Argument: Number of ballots cast by youth in 2000 was 220/500, but was 232/500 in 2004 -- therefore, voter turnout increased.

A - E: different groups aged 18 - 25

2000
A: 25
B: 40
C: 25
D: 40
E: 90
Voter turnout: 44%

2004
A: 5
B: 47
C: 35
D: 45
E: 100
Voter turnout: 46.4%


Despite Group A, voter turnout is still higher in 2004. Had the question stated: "... candidates made more of an effort to appeal to these younger voters all individual groups, so turnout was slightly higher at 39%", perhaps C could have been a more viable answer... yet still, B) voter turnout increased, and supposedly, it's because A) candidates appealed to younger voters -- in other words, A caused B. So, your reasoning is absolutely correct when you state, "There might be other reasons for the increase to 39%"; we must show that A may not have caused B -- and answer C does not show this.

__________

mba1382 wrote:
IMO C
E says that "In 2004, a referendum on lowering the legal age for purchasing alcohol to 18 was on the ballot". This actually means that candidates made an effort of bringing referendum to encourage the age-group 18 to 25 to vote in 2004 election. Therefore, this option seems to actually strengthen the argument.


Your reasoning is correct, except that the argument does not state that candidates put the referendum on the ballot to attract youth. The referendum is separate from the election, and what the argument states is that during the local election, candidates increased youth voter turnout by appealing to them. How they did so is not mentioned, so we cannot assume that their strategy was to use the referendum. So, if E were true, we ask: "Did candidates successfully increase voter turnout because they targeted youth?", our answer would be: "Well, this is possible, but it is also likely that the youth turnout increased because they wanted to vote on the referendum." In other words, A or C caused B. Therefore, we cannot conclude indefinitely that A caused B.
Re: In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between   [#permalink] 13 Oct 2013, 07:36
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Between 1995 and 2000, the minimum wage in guerrero25 2 12 Oct 2013, 15:17
1 In an election between...Help required. sreejas 3 26 Oct 2010, 06:20
Of the 2500 votes participating in a local election, three jimmyjamesdonkey 3 16 Jun 2007, 17:06
In a class of 28 students, one student is to be elected as Andre_p 7 15 Apr 2006, 07:24
In the 2000 United States presidential election, polls GMATT73 16 08 Oct 2005, 03:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the 2000 local election, only 28% of individuals between

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.