In the 2000 United States presidential election, polls

mhm good point about E, I retreat my answer

C for me

In A, if younger voters will surpass seniors, it is possible that family values might be less important
In B, 2004 is less than 10 years from 2000. Also, there were two factors that were most important to younger voters so we can't pick one as the most important
In D, it just says that the number of young voters will surpass the number of older voters, but not that older voters will be less than they are now
In E, family values might be just as important 10 years from now as they are now

C is the only one that remains

go E go....

C it is

E is obviously wrong, What is less important to registered voters is not quantified in the statement.

I vote for D -

(D) Fewer people will rank family values as the most issue in 2010 than did in 2000.

This infrered because there will be more younger people than older people in 2010. Younger people consider Economy and Environment as Major issues ; hence does it not follow that Family Values will be ranked most important issue in 2010 ?

OA / OE ?

D.

The growth of population matters, there will be less percentage of people considering family values as major issue, but will they be few in number in 10 years than now is up for debate......That is why IMO D is wrong.

Nero44> Outstanding inference and explanation

OA is E.

Explanation:
ID Question Type and Task
This question is an inference question. Therefore the task is to find an inevitable conclusion from information given. Find what must be true.

Read the Argument and Extract Necessary Information:
For inference questions:
Note how specific the topics are, watch out for percents versus numbers, look for the logical combination of two points.

Known:
・ to older voters family values and the economy are most important
・to younger voters the environment is most important
・there were more older voters than younger voters in 2000 this will not be the case in the next 10 years.

Formulate an answer to the question
This is not always possible but in this case there is a very clear connection between two points that can be made so an answer can be predicted.

In 10 years more younger voters + younger voters care most about the environment = in 10 years more voters will care about the environment.

This may not be the answer but it seems likely.
Eliminate Answer Choices:
(A) Nothing supports any statements about family values seperately from the economy so this does not have to be true.

(B) No information is given abut 4 years after 2000 the only information we have is about in 2000 and in 10 years from 2000

(C) No information is given about how much of the population votes so while something might be inferred about the voting population nothing can be inferred about the entire population.

(D) No information is given about people, while something might be inferred about the voting people nothing can be inferred about all people.

(E) This is fairly close to the predicted answer.

C can be left out because one can not know what is happenig in 2010. Terrorism, war in Irak or diseases could be more important than these issues in 2010. D is no sense. A is also no sense since trends change through the time and 10 years is a lot of time. B is out of scope and doesn't make any sense.

E is the only correct choice. If there are few senior citizens in 2010 than there were in 2000, family values will lose weight among registered voters.

Therefore the best answer is E.

E as OA does not make sense atleast to me.

what does it mean when we say "family values will be less important to registerd voters? Important to registerd voter as invidual concept is aggreable but important to registered voters as a whole does not make any sense. What changes is number of people who give importance to family value and the importance given to it is out of scope....

people who are old will still give the same importance to family value and people who are young will still give less importance to family value, there is no change in that only now the number of young people are more...

Yes, I agree with you. But, if you discard all the other possible answers, and you suposse that "important to registered voters" means "important issue", you must choose E.

Going with C.

Based on the stimulus, we cannot determine if the priority for these issues will change or not. It could be possible, that as the younger voters get older, tehy may be more concerned with family values or not so concerned.

I am going with C.
E doesn't make any sense. even if the majority of the voter chooses economy or environment ( which might not be true), still C is correct. Because it says one of the 3 will be choosen by majority.

'less important' to registered voters means that for most of the registered voters, family values 'familiy values' is not the most important issue (based on which they decide who to vote for). The opening sentence of the stem is: "In the 2000 United States presidential election, polls showed that the most important issue to registered voters was family values". This also means the same thing...most of the registered voters decided (who to vote for) based on their belief in 'family values'. Since, in the next ten years, "number of younger voters registered will surpass the number of senior voters", option E follows as a corollary.