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

It is currently 16 Apr 2014, 02:27

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

We have heard a good deal in recent years about the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
VP
VP
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1102
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the [#permalink] New post 29 Jan 2008, 05:26
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

100% (02:18) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 5 sessions
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.
1. 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.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2504
Followers: 48

Kudos [?]: 451 [0], given: 19

GMAT Tests User
Re: cr 1000 test c 1 [#permalink] New post 29 Jan 2008, 06:03
marcodonzelli 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.

1. 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.


A. I am in between A and D but finally select A that directly support the conclusion.
_________________

Verbal: new-to-the-verbal-forum-please-read-this-first-77546.html
Math: new-to-the-math-forum-please-read-this-first-77764.html
Gmat: everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html


GT

VP
VP
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1102
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: cr 1000 test c 1 [#permalink] New post 29 Jan 2008, 06:45
GMAT TIGER wrote:
marcodonzelli 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.

1. 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.


A. I am in between A and D but finally select A that directly support the conclusion.


explantion please
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 957
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 48

Kudos [?]: 621 [0], given: 40

GMAT Tests User
Re: cr 1000 test c 1 [#permalink] New post 22 Apr 2010, 01:11
marcodonzelli 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.
1. 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.


I selected D but later I realised that A is correct.

Reasons:
1. In the stimulus, it is mentioned that: we are told that power of parties doent decide the elections outcome rather mass media decides.
2. An example is given for weakness on 3rd party front.
3. An emphasis is made on campaign expenses (raised and spent more money than ever before in support).
4. A contradiction is made for the mass media reports.

So, we need to find a reason/assumption, which can show that the above contradiction is a valid one. Here, A fits better than D.

In addition to this, D is wrong because there is no mention of FAVOR b/w parties by mass media in the above argument.
_________________

Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2012
Posts: 252
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 91 [0], given: 102

CAT Tests
Re: We have heard a good deal in recent years about the [#permalink] New post 01 Jan 2013, 09:58
A good explanation here:
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/100 ... t1530.html

Quote:
My guess is that the author of this question lists A as the correct answer.

1) Some people think major parties aren't as influential.
2) Those people think the media is more influential than the parties.
3) But the two major parties have won all of the recent important elections.
4) And they have raised and spent even more money than they used to.
5) So we don't really have appropriate evidence to say that the two-party system is dying. (NOTE: it does NOT say that the two party system is thriving, that those people are wrong to say the media is influential, etc. It simply says "we don't have the evidence to support that contention yet.")

A) The argument offers sentence 4 as a premise to support the author's conclusion (sentence 5). So the author is assuming that money raised / spent is actually a valid criterion by which to judge the importance of the two-party system.
B) More people may run, but if they don't win, then the major parties aren't suffering a decline.
C) This may be true in general, but it does not answer the specific question - the argument doesn't address the stability (or lack thereof) of the American political structure
D) The author is likely assuming that the mass media does give airtime to independent or third-party candidates. This doesn't necessarily mean that the media favors those candidates at the expense of the major party candidates. If the media just treats them all the same, and the media is the most influential thing, then we would expect SOME ind. / 3rd party candidates to win, but the argument indicates that only the major candidates are winning the important elections.
E) Again, this may be true, or it might even be something we can conclude based upon the argument, but the question is what assumption is necessary to support the author's conclusion. We don't have to assume the media is relatively unimportant - the author's point is not to diminish the media's importance but to say that the the major parties are not declining in importance.

_________________
Stacey Koprince
Instructor
Director of Online Community
ManhattanGMAT

_________________

"Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well."
― Voltaire


Press Kudos, if I have helped.
Thanks!

Re: We have heard a good deal in recent years about the   [#permalink] 01 Jan 2013, 09:58
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
New posts We have heard a good deal in recent years about the sonaketu 5 03 Dec 2004, 04:27
New posts We have heard a good deal in recent years about the ywilfred 7 05 Sep 2005, 07:38
New posts We have heard a good deal in recent years about the gmat2006 6 27 Sep 2005, 11:02
New posts We have heard a good deal in recent years about the vc019 8 07 Nov 2005, 18:50
New posts We have heard a good deal in recent years about the vivek123 3 20 Feb 2006, 06:50
Display posts from previous: Sort by

We have heard a good deal in recent years about the

  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®.