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:
Mr. Janeck: I don t believe Stevenson will win the election [#permalink]
29 Aug 2005, 05:58
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Mr. Janeck: I donâ€™t believe Stevenson will win the election for governor. Few voters are willing to elect a businessman with no political experience to such a responsible public office.
Ms. Siuzdak: Youâ€™re wrong. The experience of running a major corporation is a valuable preparation for the task of running a state government.
M. Siuzdakâ€™s response shows that she has interpreted Mr. Janeckâ€™s remark to imply which of the following?
(A) Mr. Janeck considers Stevenson unqualified for the office of governor.
(B) No candidate without political experience has ever been elected governor of a state.
(C) Mr. Janeck believes that political leadership and business leadership are closely analogous.
(D) A career spent in the pursuit of profit can be an impediment to oneâ€™s ability to run a state government fairly.
(E) Voters generally overestimate the value of political experience when selecting a candidate.
I believe E is there to confuse a reader while he or she is thinking about the question and the passage. What we want here, is to know how Mr Siuzdak has interpreted the message. It's clear that he has thought about it as whether a person is competent to do the job, and not whether voters over-estimate value of political experience. If the latter was the case, he answer would have been quite different, mayb along these lines "the current mayor was thought of by the public as very experienced, but he is a total flop"
It cannot be C. Clearly, Mr Siuzdak is arguing that running a big business is a good preparation for political office. This means he has interpreted Mr Janeck's comment as Stevenson is not suitable for office. This clearly is not what C says.