Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 24 Mar 2017, 07:36

### 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

# Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 288
Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V33
WE: Consulting (Telecommunications)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 149 [5] , given: 75

Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 03:00
5
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

50% (02:45) correct 50% (01:43) wrong based on 412 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, illegal immigration is an important issue in the current race for mayor. Of the two candidates for mayor, one supports a plan that would attempt to deport the city’s 9,000 illegal immigrants and the other does not. Surveys consistently show that about 60% of the city’s residents are opposed to the plan, while about 35% are in support of the plan. Therefore, the candidate who does not support the plan will win the election for mayor.

All of the following statements weaken the analyst’s argument, EXCEPT:

a. In the city at issue, most voters make their voting decisions based on the candidates’ positions on abortion.
b. Of the 35% of residents who support the plan, some are willing to consider alternate plans for addressing illegal immigration.
c. Many of the residents who oppose the plan are not registered voters.
d. The candidate who supports the plan is the incumbent mayor, and has been elected to four consecutive terms despite taking controversial positions on many important issues.
e. Just under 30% of the city’s residents are illegal immigrants who cannot vote.

Edit: by carcass

[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA soon. Please explain the PoE
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

YOU CAN, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN

Last edited by greatps24 on 17 Feb 2013, 05:10, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Senior Manager
Status: Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 490
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Followers: 353

Kudos [?]: 1970 [6] , given: 82

Re: CR 700+ : Illegal immigration [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 03:55
6
KUDOS
Expert's post
greatps24 wrote:
Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, illegal immigration is an important issue in the current race for mayor. Of the two candidates for mayor, one supports a plan that would attempt to deport the city’s 9,000 illegal immigrants and the other does not. Surveys consistently show that about 60% of the city’s residents are opposed to the plan, while about 35% are in support of the plan. Therefore, the candidate who does not support the plan will win the election for mayor.

All of the following statements weaken the analyst’s argument, EXCEPT:

a. In the city at issue, most voters make their voting decisions based on the candidates’ positions on abortion.
b. Of the 35% of residents who support the plan, some are willing to consider alternate plans for addressing illegal immigration.
c. Many of the residents who oppose the plan are not registered voters.
d. The candidate who supports the plan is the incumbent mayor, and has been elected to four consecutive terms despite taking controversial positions on many important issues.
e. Just under 30% of the city’s residents are illegal immigrants who cannot vote.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA soon. Please explain the PoE

(A) If voters make their decision based on abortion then a candidate's position on the illegal immigration proposal will have no effect on his/her candidacy, thus weakening the conclusion.

(C) If many of the residents who oppose the plan are not registered voters then it will put the group which opposes the plan in minority. So, the candidate so opposes the plan may not necessarily win the election. This choice also weakens the conclusion.

(D) This choice directly attacks the assumption that the argument makes - People's opinions decide which candidate will win the election. If a candidate is re-ellected multiple times in spite of his support for controversial issues, then people's opinions do not matter in election.

(E) If around 30% of the residents are illegal immigrants then the percentage of people who oppose the plan would drop to 30%. So the candidate who opposes the plan may not necessarily win the election.
Now the only choice that is left is (b), the answer

Reason why B is correct. If 35% people who support the plan are considering alternate ways to address the immigration, then these people may not vote for the candidate who supports the plan and may vote the candidate who opposes the plan. This choice strengthens the conclusion.

Hope that helps,

Vercules,

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1095
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 539 [1] , given: 70

Re: CR 700+ : Illegal immigration [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 04:47
1
KUDOS
Hi Vercules
I agree that B is correct. But was hard to eliminate E. For E we will have to assume that 30% of the illegal immigrants were a part of 65% of people , who opposed the plan, basis on which conclusion was drawn that candidates who support the plan may stand to lose the election.

How would you categorize E with respect to the correct answer types in case of cause and effect reasoning. Is it weakening the survey type of answer.

Archit
Senior Manager
Status: Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 490
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Followers: 353

Kudos [?]: 1970 [1] , given: 82

Re: CR 700+ : Illegal immigration [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 07:33
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
Archit143 wrote:
Hi Vercules
I agree that B is correct. But was hard to eliminate E. For E we will have to assume that 30% of the illegal immigrants were a part of 65% of people , who opposed the plan, basis on which conclusion was drawn that candidates who support the plan may stand to lose the election.

How would you categorize E with respect to the correct answer types in case of cause and effect reasoning. Is it weakening the survey type of answer.

Archit

Hi Archit,

Yes, for sure it is weakening the argument. But, the argument does not have a cause and effect reasoning. Answer choice (E) is not weakening the survey but the conclusion. It is providing new data about the survey, in light of which the results of the given survey would change, thus, weakening the conclusion.

Vercules
_________________

MBA Section Director
Status: Back to work...
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 22 Feb 2012
Posts: 4205
Location: India
City: Pune
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.4
Followers: 417

Kudos [?]: 3037 [1] , given: 2256

Re: CR 700+ : Illegal immigration [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 08:37
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
It's B.
Analysis of Argument :- illegal immigration is an important issue. One candidate plans to deport illegal immigrants whereas other does not. 60% of residents opposed the plan whereas 35% supported it. So the conclusion is, the candidate who oppose the plan will win the election because he enjoys support of 60% residents. There are several things which must have assumed while drawing the conclusion and if did not they will weaken the conclusion. Any choice that contain reasoning reverse of them will be incorrect here 1) all or substantial residents do posses the voting right. 2) all or substantial residents that oppose the plan would actually vote on election day. 3) all or substantial residents that oppose the plan would cast their votes to the candidate who also oppose this plan.

A) Incorrect. This clearly weakens the argument by saying voters do not vote on the basis of candidates' position on illegal migration

B) This choice stays neutral and is correct answer.

C) Incorrect. If substatial voters who oppose the plan have no voting rights then it is difficult for that candidate to win. Weakens the argument.

D) Incorrect. This says there are other factors than illegal immigration on which voters decides whom to vote. Otherwise the candidate who supports the plan would have not been elected again and again

E) This choice seems not to weakens the argument at first(so i kept it as a contender initially) but if look closely it reveals that the residents are devided in three sections 60%(opposers), 35%(supporters), and 5%(neutral). Now the percentage of illegal immigrants is possibily 28% or 29% (just under 30%)and those should must be in 60% section. if those 28% have no voting rights then the candidate who oppose the plan would left with only 32% supporters who can actually vote and can not win the election with that. This weakens the argument. Incorrect.
_________________
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1180
Followers: 427

Kudos [?]: 1554 [3] , given: 4

Re: CR 700+ : Illegal immigration [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 15:03
3
KUDOS
Expert's post
Vercules wrote:

(E) If around 30% of the residents are illegal immigrants then the percentage of people who oppose the plan would drop to 30%. So the candidate who opposes the plan may not necessarily win the election.

The part I've highlighted in red is not quite right, mathematically. Say you have 100 people:

--> 60 oppose the plan
--> 35 support the plan
--> 5 are neutral

but we know 30 of these people are illegal immigrants and cannot vote. Assuming they all oppose the plan, when we remove those 30 people from the opposition, we have:

--> 30 oppose the plan
--> 35 support the plan
--> 5 are neutral

The total number of people is now much less than 100. So we don't have 30% opposition; we have 30/70 = 43% opposition. And if you group the opposition with those who are neutral, then you find that 50% of all people are either in opposition or are neutral (and more than 50% are if you take into account that the number of illegal immigrants is actually 'just under 30%').

So while I agree that E weakens the analyst's argument, it would be a mistake to conclude from E that a majority of actual voters will support the plan; that's still untrue even using E.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3149
Followers: 821

Kudos [?]: 6914 [0], given: 1051

Re: Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, illega [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2013, 15:10

rules-for-posting-in-verbal-gmat-forum-134642.html

thanks you
_________________
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10667
Followers: 957

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 0

Re: Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2014, 22:08
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.
Current Student
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 299
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 680 Q48 V34
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 242

Re: CR 700+ : Illegal immigration [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2014, 22:09
Narenn wrote:
It's B.
Analysis of Argument :- illegal immigration is an important issue. One candidate plans to deport illegal immigrants whereas other does not. 60% of residents opposed the plan whereas 35% supported it. So the conclusion is, the candidate who oppose the plan will win the election because he enjoys support of 60% residents. There are several things which must have assumed while drawing the conclusion and if did not they will weaken the conclusion. Any choice that contain reasoning reverse of them will be incorrect here 1) all or substantial residents do posses the voting right. 2) all or substantial residents that oppose the plan would actually vote on election day. 3) all or substantial residents that oppose the plan would cast their votes to the candidate who also oppose this plan.

A) Incorrect. This clearly weakens the argument by saying voters do not vote on the basis of candidates' position on illegal migration

B) This choice stays neutral and is correct answer.

C) Incorrect. If substatial voters who oppose the plan have no voting rights then it is difficult for that candidate to win. Weakens the argument.

D) Incorrect. This says there are other factors than illegal immigration on which voters decides whom to vote. Otherwise the candidate who supports the plan would have not been elected again and again

E) This choice seems not to weakens the argument at first(so i kept it as a contender initially) but if look closely it reveals that the residents are devided in three sections 60%(opposers), 35%(supporters), and 5%(neutral). Now the percentage of illegal immigrants is possibily 28% or 29% (just under 30%)and those should must be in 60% section. if those 28% have no voting rights then the candidate who oppose the plan would left with only 32% supporters who can actually vote and can not win the election with that. This weakens the argument. Incorrect.

Very precise explanation for E. Thanks.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10667
Followers: 957

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 0

Re: Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2015, 20:59
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.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10667
Followers: 957

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 0

Re: Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2016, 18:26
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.
Re: Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city,   [#permalink] 31 Jul 2016, 18:26
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
10 CR Revision: Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city 7 28 Jan 2016, 12:00
7 Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, 10 16 May 2012, 22:09
Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, 8 12 Jul 2011, 09:55
2 City official: In order to revitalize our city's downtown 6 30 Jan 2010, 15:46
12 Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, 21 14 Oct 2009, 06:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by