It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 12:35

### 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

# Politician: From the time our party took office almost four

Author Message
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

Politician: From the time our party took office almost four [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2005, 16:52
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

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

### HideShow timer Statistics

22. Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago the number of people unemployed city-wide increased by less than 20 percent. The opposition party controlled city government during the four preceding years, and the number of unemployed city residents rose by over 20 percent. Thus, due to our leadership, fewer people now find themselves among the ranks of the unemployed, whatever the opposition may claim.

The reasoning in the politicianâ€™s argument is most vulnerable to the criticism that

(A) the claims made by the opposition are simply dismissed without being specified
(B) no evidence has been offered to show that any decline in unemployment over the past four years was uniform throughout all areas of the city
(C) the issue of how much unemployment in the city is affected by seasonal fluctuations is ignored
(D) the evidence cited in support of the conclusion actually provides more support for the denial of the conclusion
(E) the possibility has not been addressed that any increase in the number of people employed is due to programs supported by the opposition party

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 841

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2005, 21:36
Choose E

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2005
Posts: 666

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

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2005, 21:45
E....

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

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2005, 23:04
(A) the claims made by the opposition are simply dismissed without being specified
- Not important

(B) no evidence has been offered to show that any decline in unemployment over the past four years was uniform throughout all areas of the city
- Not important. It doesn't matter whether one area was highly employed, the figures was indicative city wide

(C) the issue of how much unemployment in the city is affected by seasonal fluctuations is ignored
- Not important. The same seasonal effects would have affted the current party as well

(D) the evidence cited in support of the conclusion actually provides more support for the denial of the conclusion
- Out.

(E) the possibility has not been addressed that any increase in the number of people employed is due to programs supported by the opposition party
- If this is the case, then the opposition party had foresight and so has a capable leadership as well

E for me

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 543

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 0

Location: Canuckland

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2005, 02:09
D.

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 270

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

Location: Auckland, New Zealand

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2005, 02:18
i would say D because the fact that the unemployment INCREASED (by whatever percent) doesn't speak in favour for the present government...as it means that the unemployment rates were lower for the previous government

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 841

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2005, 02:31
cloudz9 wrote:
i would say D because the fact that the unemployment INCREASED (by whatever percent) doesn't speak in favour for the present government...as it means that the unemployment rates were lower for the previous government

not my day - agree with D

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2005, 03:58
cloudz9 wrote:
i would say D because the fact that the unemployment INCREASED (by whatever percent) doesn't speak in favour for the present government...as it means that the unemployment rates were lower for the previous government

nice one, was completely fooled by the question

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2005, 07:18
The OA is D, got fooled into choosing E too. Watch out !!

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

Display posts from previous: Sort by