It is currently 18 Nov 2017, 16:39

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In a political system with only two major parties, the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

5 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 74

Kudos [?]: 54 [5], given: 0

In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2008, 17:24
5
This post received
KUDOS
17
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

57% (01:37) correct 43% (01:42) wrong based on 1157 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most reliably inferred from it?

(A) If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
(B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
(C) A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
(D) The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.

Explain your choice please.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 54 [5], given: 0

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 934

Kudos [?]: 354 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2008, 18:22
Premise 1: In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. Premise 2: The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate.
Conclusion: Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Passage says third candidate affects one of the major parties candidate by drawing his/her voters, so it can be assumed that new voters who never voted might not vote from this third candidate.

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
The passage does not support that third party will have radical views.

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
This is again in contrary to premise 1. Because if third party is coalition of former leaders from both parties, then voters of both candidates should be affected.

So Answer is C.

Kudos [?]: 354 [0], given: 0

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 541 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2008, 19:02
Yes, i also agree with this.
abhijit_sen wrote:
Premise 1: In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. Premise 2: The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate.
Conclusion: Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Passage says third candidate affects one of the major parties candidate by drawing his/her voters, so it can be assumed that new voters who never voted might not vote from this third candidate.

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
The passage does not support that third party will have radical views.

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
This is again in contrary to premise 1. Because if third party is coalition of former leaders from both parties, then voters of both candidates should be affected.

So Answer is C.

Kudos [?]: 541 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 74

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2008, 19:13
You guys are falling for the same trap I did...at least I'm not alone.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 215

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 3

Location: Pune
Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2008, 19:36
abhijit_sen wrote:
Premise 1: In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. Premise 2: The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate.
Conclusion: Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
As per premise 1 only 1 of the parties should get affected not both, so this is incorrect.

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
Passage says third candidate affects one of the major parties candidate by drawing his/her voters, so it can be assumed that new voters who never voted might not vote from this third candidate.

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
The passage does not support that third party will have radical views.

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
This is again in contrary to premise 1. Because if third party is coalition of former leaders from both parties, then voters of both candidates should be affected.

So Answer is C.


How can C be the infrence when it is written that "The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate" so i suppose it would have been a better infrence if it was written that new party will attract new canidates who have no voted for anone as this goes in line with the passage and is not explicitly stated in the passage...............
_________________

Every Problem Has a Sloution So keep working
AB

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 3

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 934

Kudos [?]: 354 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jun 2008, 20:37
sebycb976 wrote:
You guys are falling for the same trap I did...at least I'm not alone.

A blind following another blind and both falling in ditch does not make condition any better.

Kudos [?]: 354 [0], given: 0

4 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 751

Kudos [?]: 235 [4], given: 8

Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2008, 00:00
4
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
sebycb976 wrote:
In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.
If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most reliably inferred from it?

A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.

Explain your choice please.


I go for B, since if before the 3rd party comes into the picture, there was a 50-50 split, the third party will only get voters from only one pool. So the 50-50 split will turn into a 50-(50-X)-X split. So B, and only B can be correctly inferred

Kudos [?]: 235 [4], given: 8

1 KUDOS received
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2947

Kudos [?]: 674 [1], given: 210

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2008, 00:54
1
This post received
KUDOS
Its clear B guys.

similar reasons to buddady's

Kudos [?]: 674 [1], given: 210

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 74

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2008, 10:07
B is the OA although I am still not 100% clear I understand the reason.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

9 KUDOS received
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2947

Kudos [?]: 674 [9], given: 210

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2008, 15:51
9
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Okay according to B

Votes are divided equally. Lets say there are 100 voters.

So
A - 50 votes
B - 50 votes

Now a candidate C enters the race. According to the passage C is likely to take over either A's votebank or B's vote bank. Lets say C takes over A's vote bank by 10%.

Now
A - 40
B - 50
C - 10

As you can see, neither of the three parties will get over 50% of the votes. This is the quintessential CR numbers trap. You have to dig deeper than the surface to find the actual answer.

cheers.

Kudos [?]: 674 [9], given: 210

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 74

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2008, 16:41
Many thanks bsd, makes sense now

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

3 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 780

Kudos [?]: 189 [3], given: 0

Re: CR - Political Parties [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2008, 18:20
3
This post received
KUDOS
A. If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties. [ Not true – as per argument, the third party draws unequally – eliminate it]

B. If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote. [true – Hold it]

C. A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties. [this may be true – but since argument never discusses about new voters - eliminate it]

D. The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties. [too extreme – eliminate it]

E. The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties. [Not per argument – eliminate it]

Answer: B

Kudos [?]: 189 [3], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 255

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 1

In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 07:59
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into
an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party
candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the
two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party
candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any
control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.
If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most
reliably inferred from it?
(A) If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two
major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
(B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two
major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of
the vote.
(C) A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for
candidates of either of the two major parties.
(D) The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major
parties.
(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the
two major parties.
_________________

Choose Life

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 1

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 May 2009
Posts: 168

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 3

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 11:21
trainspotting wrote:
In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.
If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most reliably inferred from it?

(A) If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
(B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
(C) A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
(D) The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.
(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.


Here we have a 'must be true' question...

(A) we don't know that the influence will be 'equal'... a third party might draw 60% of its votes from one party & 40 from the other.
(C) We can't deduce this from the info, for it did not discuss new/old voters.
(D) We don't know this either, we just know the 3rd party will only appeal to one party's members or those of the other, the info does not tell us anything about political ideology.
(E) We also can't deduce this from the info; in fact, considering that only the members of ONE party will be attracted, this is most likely not true.

By POE, we're left with (B).

Last edited by GMATaddict on 27 Jun 2009, 12:12, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 3

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2008
Posts: 286

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 15

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 12:06
B for me too :)

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 15

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 102

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

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 16:30
It's B for me

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 60

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2009, 03:09
OA?

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 72

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 1

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2009, 07:09
is something wrong with the wordings of otion B

B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more
than one-half of the vote.

it itself says "voters were divided equally between the two major parties,"

if there are 100 voters and we divide them equally between two major parties then for sure neither parties is likely to capture more than 1/2 of the votes.

anything u divide equally between to people each will get 1/2 of it. :-D

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 1

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 59

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 6

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2009, 09:25
B can be the only option. But not through a sound logical conclusion but because other options were even worse.. :(

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 6

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 85

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 1

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2009, 11:22
hitman4683v1 wrote:
B can be the only option. But not through a sound logical conclusion but because other options were even worse.. :(

I have doubt with anser B. Since it is "Must be true" question type, the answer must be inferred from the stimulus. Whereas the stimulus only tells that the emergance of the thrid party affects once of the two party and it does not tell about individual positions of two parties.
Where am i wrong?
_________________

Consider kudos for good post.

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 1

Re: In a political system with only two major parties, the   [#permalink] 01 Oct 2009, 11:22

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 58 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In a political system with only two major parties, the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.