In stating the argument that the President does not care about the pli

I fell for B too..

But the below explanation should help. The keyword in the sentence is "stating"

In stating the argument that the President does not care about the plight of the poor, a prominent Democrat implied that Republicans have never been concerned about it [plight].

Will go with E

While stating one can 'imply' not 'infer'

Corerct Verb is Imply..as the speaker himself trying to conclude. Infer is when someone makes a statement and another person tries to conclude or sum it up.
In this case the person is the same. So "imply" should be used.

so choice narrows to C and E.
Difference is "them" and "it" at the end.

The antecedent is plight of the poor not poor for the pronoun..
So "it" is the proper pronoun.

answer is E

The Answer is E

For Everyone Reference
NFER vs. IMPLY

The best way to remember the difference between these two words is to think in terms of the model used by communications theorists. Communication consists of a message, a sender, and a receiver. The sender can imply, but the receiver can only infer. The error that usually occurs is that the word infer is mistakenly used for imply.


WRONG: Are you inferring that I am a fool?
RIGHT: Are you implying that I am a fool?


If someone gets the idea from your behavior that you are a fool, then he is inferring that you are a fool. But if he is subtly letting you know that he thinks so, then he is implying that you are a fool. You, of course, can infer from his implication that he thinks you are a fool.


IMPLY = to put the suggestion into the message (sender implies)

INFER = to take the suggestion out of the message (receiver infers)

IMPLICATION = what the sender has implied

INFERENCE = what the receiver has inferred

In stating the argument that the President does not care about the plight of the poor, a prominent Democrat inferred that Republicans have never been concerned about them.

A prominent democrat will never infer, he/she can only imply a new point in order to demean the republicans so implied is a better choice.

(A) a prominent Democrat inferred that Republicans have never been concerned about them.
them-incorrect pronoun for "plight"
(B) a prominent Democrat inferred that Republicans have never been concerned about the poor.
incorrect - plight not poor
(C) a prominent Democrat implied that Republicans have never been concerned about them.
them-incorrect pronoun for "plight"
(D) a prominent Democrat inferred that Republicans have never been concerned about it.
inferred -incorrect
(E) a prominent Democrat implied that Republicans have never been concerned about it.
it refers to the plight not the poor -correct

I think E, because "it" refers back to plight.

Hi 1terrific

Welcome to gmatclub

D is wrong because "infer" is used incorrectly in the sentence's context.

Let think this way.
IMPLY vs INFER
Communication consists of a message, a sender, and a receiver. The sender can imply, but the receiver can only infer. Very often, the word infer is mistakenly used for imply.

For example:
WRONG: Peter infers that he is the best student <-- Peter is the sender, he can only imply
CORRECT: Peter implies that he is the best student.

Back to the question, the prominent Democrat in stating blah blah... implied that............. <== because he is the sender of the message, thus he can only imply, not infer.

Hope it helps.

Why is that everyone forgets that the correct answer choice must convey the intended meaning?
Let's look at the differences:
"Inferred" or "implied"
"them", "the poor", or "it".
Even though both terms "Inferred" and "implied" have a similar meaning, and the sentence will mean the same no matter which term we select, I believe that in this context, for the sake of clarity, "implied" fits better. However, I would not eliminate the other choice.

On the other hand, "them" clearly refers to the poor, so the choice "the poor" is unnecessary. "It" refers to "the plight". The question is: What is the author's intended meaning? The original sentence uses "them", so it refers to the poor. The sentence is logical, and the implication is that "republicans have never been concerned about the poor."
"It" refers to the plight of the poor; it implies that "republicans have never been concerned about the plight of the poor"
What is what republicans are not concerned with, "the poor" or "the plight of the poor"?
I believe that "the poor" not only makes more sense, but also is what the original sentence uses.
In conclusion, I find that choices A, B, and C convey the original meaning and are grammatically correct. My preference is C because I prefer the term "implied" to the term "inferred".

I believe that D and E are wrong because they use the term "it", which refers to "the plight of the poor". This is not what the original sentence states, and there is no reason to believe that it is what the author intended.
_________________

In stating the argument that the President does not care about the plight of the poor, a prominent Democrat (inferred syn;deduce,conclude,generalised,derived)/(implied syn;connoted,indirectly,latent,hidden etc) that Republicans have never been concerned about them.
looking at the two infered and implied, and base on the augment about the president's negligence of the poor which is the plight(it)/trouble/condition/predicament. i will go for 'D'

When using "them" it may refer to the Democrats themselves, only when you use "it" the Clause has one meaning.

This SC question is all about meaning !

Between infer and imply, we better choose ''imply'' because the prominent Democrate wants to ''imply'' the Republicans (not infer the Republicans).

The use of about them is false because we want a pronoun that can replace the antecedent ''the plight'', so ''it'' is a good choice.

(about the poor is repeated so redundant !)

A,B,C is out !

We choose E because E uses ''imply'' & ''about it'', which is correct in meaning of the context. So we can eliminate D.

Answer E.

Structural ambiguity is acceptable if the pronoun is clear by context. The moment I read the sentence I understood that the author referred to the poor because he used them. I believe that if we change the pronoun to it, we change the meaning of the sentence.

The question is: Republicans are not concerned about the plight? Or republicans are not concerned about the poor?
I believe that the intended meaning is the latter.
If the intended meaning was the plight, then the author has done a good job at fooling me.
_________________

I doubt that the answer can be E for several reasons.

Firstly, as mentioned by more respected users before me the meaning of the original question is altered by choice E.

Secondly, the arguments stating that the verb "infer" is substandard to "imply" because one cannot infer throughout his or her own rhetoric is probably not true but I might be wrong. Infer = to conclude or to deduce.

I believe C is correct as it correctly takes care of pronoun/antecedent issue and conveys the true meaning of the original sentence.

Lastly, I am slightly concerned with the integrity of the question as the source is "other".

First of all we have to refer back to the plight not the poor so use its rather than of their.
Sencondly inferred is used for the indirect statement but the statement is direct so use implied

Posted from my mobile device iPhone

[size=80][b][i]Posted from my mobile device

The original sentence says them, and we should not change the meaning.
You state:
First of all we have to refer back to the plight not the poor so use its rather than of their.
Why?
_________________

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________