GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 19 Jan 2019, 14:43

### 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 January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### FREE Quant Workshop by e-GMAT!

January 20, 2019

January 20, 2019

07:00 AM PST

07:00 AM PST

Get personalized insights on how to achieve your Target Quant Score.
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

January 19, 2019

January 19, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.

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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior CR Moderator
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1373
Location: Viet Nam
Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 09 Oct 2018, 04:42
12
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

33% (01:49) correct 67% (01:44) wrong based on 302 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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 politician’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

Source: LSAT

_________________

Originally posted by broall on 04 Oct 2017, 01:04.
Last edited by Bunuel on 09 Oct 2018, 04:42, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 335
Location: San Francisco
Re: Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2017, 02:03
1
1
This is a weaken question. With these, it's important to look as closely as possible at the premises and the conclusion. Make sure you don't change the words as they're written to fix a bad argument. Often, the arguments made in CR passages are so terrible that, in taking notes, you end up making them better. Don't do it!

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.

Conclusion: Fewer people are unemployed because of party
Premise: Our party saw unemployment increase by less than 20%, other party by more than 20%

At first glance, this may look like a typical "percent isn't the same as number" kind of question. But look closely at the conclusion. The party is saying fewer people are unemployed, when they admit that there was an INCREASE in unemployment! Just because it was less than 20% doesn't make it a decrease. In reality, the fact cited totally undermines that conclusion.

The reasoning in the politician’s argument is most vulnerable to the criticism that
(A) the claims made by the opposition are simply dismissed without being specified
Problem: This argument has nothing to do with what the opposition did or didn't do. In fact, all that stuff about opposition is a big red herring. All we care about is whether or not there are "fewer people" unemployed now than before the party took power.

(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
Problem: Unemployment density is immaterial; we just need the overall number.

(C) the issue of how much unemployment in the city is affected by seasonal fluctuations is ignored
Problem: This doesn't address the data we've been given, and is irrelevant.

(D) the evidence cited in support of the conclusion actually provides more support for the denial of the conclusion
Answer: Yep. If unemployment INCREASED, even by 2%, that would lead one to the conclusion that MORE people are unemployed, not fewer.

(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
Problem: This is tempting, because it makes it sound like the opposition might have had some effect on a later increase in employment. However, there was no increase! There was only a decrease of "less than 20%".
_________________

Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Director
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 632
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.76
Re: Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2017, 04:48
1
broall wrote:
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 politician’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

Source: LSAT

Will go with D
Conclusion is : fewer people now find themselves among the ranks of the unemployed, whatever the opposition may claim.-----we are talking about absolute number here ..

Now according to argument : 4 years back , let 100 were unemployed ...
now as politician stated , the unemployment rate rose less than 20% in his tenure ....so let say 15 %...
Now latest number of people unemployment --115 ...That is greater than previous number ...

hence the conclusion is faulty ..that is what D is saying ,
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 454
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Nov 2017, 04:13
1
Good explanation from MGMAT:

(A) is not true. There is no claim offered by the opposition that is simply dismissed. We would need to be able to point to a claim made by the opposition that the author dismisses, and even then the claim would need to be central to the politician's argument.
(B) is too specific. The argument never concludes that the unemployment was uniform throughout all areas of the city.
(C) is too narrow in scope. Definitely season fluctuations could be at play, but could not influence numbers that span a four year period.
(E) is the most tempting of the incorrect answers. It addresses a possible alternative cause, but those programs under the opposition, might yet have been supported by the politician's party.
_________________

D-Day: November 18th, 2017

Need a laugh and a break? Go here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/mental-break-funny-videos-270269.html

Need a CR tutor? PM me!

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 3568
Re: Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2018, 06:04
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: Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago &nbs [#permalink] 12 Dec 2018, 06:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by