We have heard a good deal in recent years about the : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 17 Jan 2017, 03:53

### 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

# We have heard a good deal in recent years about the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

We have heard a good deal in recent years about the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 18:50
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.

Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 586
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 19:56
Looks like A.
What is the OA
SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1890
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 291 [0], given: 0

Re: CR # Major Political Parties. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 03:16
vc019 wrote:
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.

Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.

The conclusion that "It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best." based firstly on the fact that "the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms". There's a hidden assumption here, in other words, a logic gap. Only A fills this gap by stating how important money is in the outcome of an election.
A it is.
SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1723
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 326 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 04:13
Let's see

We have 2 Premises here

1. no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years

2. the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms

The conclusion is

reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best

From the Premise the conclusion has been drwan based on hidden assumption that fill the logical gap.

A. fills the logical Gapl
B. it can be another conclusion
C. out of scope.
D. personal attack
E. out of scope.

_________________

hey ya......

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 235
Followers: 2

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

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 11:28
God...at least found something where I choose what others choose too...go A go...but why not B?? Hmm...
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1810
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 136 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 11:49
Between A and B, A looks like an assumption.
VP
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 1120
Location: CA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 102 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 13:55
D is better in this case, to me.

argument:
It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms.

The general belief:
The outcome of election is determined by:
(a) mass media
(b) not by power of the parties

In reality:
(a) no independent or 3rd party candidate has won
(b) major parties raised and spent more money

here, (a) is contradicted with (a) and same for b.

ans choice (A) says major parties raised and spent more money
-> influence of the party

it should have been better if it said:
-> power of the party

D negates relationship between two (a)'s above.
SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1723
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 326 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2005, 12:13
_________________

hey ya......

Manager
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 209
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2005, 06:19
Between A and D, I pick A

That the mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties does not mean that the mass media will help the third-party candidate win the election. So if we negate D, the argument is still valid.
11 Nov 2005, 06:19
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Shopkeeper: Every year, for the past five years, we have had to raise 1 12 Sep 2016, 03:45
9 We have heard a good deal in recent years about the 8 04 Jun 2011, 00:35
2 We have heard a good deal in recent years about the 20 23 Oct 2008, 22:53
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the 4 29 Jan 2008, 05:26
Display posts from previous: Sort by