It is currently 22 Jan 2018, 22:20

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

Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway

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

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 14
Location: Canada
Schools: HBS '18
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2016, 15:35
hwgmat2015 wrote:
Tricky question !! I spent a lot of time trying to figure out authors assumption till i realized that the question is not asking authors assumption.

We need to find - assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?
Note it is NOT asking authors assumption.

Press secretary Conclusion: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties

So B.

No doubt we get confused as to why B when its already mentioned in the passage.

Hope this helps :)


You nailed it. I spent probably an hour trying to figure this question out but your explanation cleared it out for me. It just shows how important it is to restate every word in the conclusion. Thank you and Kudos.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Apr 2016
Posts: 100
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2016, 07:44
I have a slight doubt about the 'negation' technique.

In this technique, do we negate all the possible cues (that can be negated) in the statement , or do we negate only one major cue.

Eg.

Will the negation of B read as:
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.

or as:

B. The scheduled highway projects not identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.



and E will read as:

E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects

or as:

E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as not a source of objective assessment of government projects


I have been told this is a really powerful technique but I am really confused about how to deploy it.


pb_india wrote:
Press secretary: Our critics claim that the President's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90% of the projects cancelled were in such districts. But all of the cancelled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary's argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.
C. The number of projects cancelled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. Nonpartisan auditors were President's friends.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects.
Expert Post
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7875
Location: Pune, India
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2016, 22:03
ameyaprabhu wrote:
I have a slight doubt about the 'negation' technique.

In this technique, do we negate all the possible cues (that can be negated) in the statement , or do we negate only one major cue.

Eg.

Will the negation of B read as:
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.

or as:

B. The scheduled highway projects not identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.



and E will read as:

E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects

or as:

E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as not a source of objective assessment of government projects


I have been told this is a really powerful technique but I am really confused about how to deploy it.


pb_india wrote:
Press secretary: Our critics claim that the President's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90% of the projects cancelled were in such districts. But all of the cancelled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary's argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.
C. The number of projects cancelled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. Nonpartisan auditors were President's friends.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects.


Yes, read about it here:
http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2015/02 ... reasoning/

And you will negate only the main cue.

B - The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.
Negated B - The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.

E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects.
Negated E - Reports by nonpartisan auditors are generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects.


Here is a post on double negatives:
http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2013/01 ... negatives/
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 18 Jun 2016
Posts: 271
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 4
WE: General Management (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2016, 11:33
pb_india wrote:
Press secretary: Our critics claim that the President's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90% of the projects cancelled were in such districts. But all of the cancelled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary's argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party.
C. The number of projects cancelled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. Nonpartisan auditors were President's friends.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects.

Conclusion: So the President's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Therefore, correct assumption will strengthen this conclusion and that is the job that B is performing perfectly. B eliminates the possibility that the President hand-picked those districts that are controlled by opposition parties by saying that the President had no other choice because most of the Flagged districts are controlled by opposition.
_________________

I'd appreciate learning about the grammatical errors in my posts

Please hit Kudos If my Solution helps

My Debrief for 750 - https://gmatclub.com/forum/from-720-to-750-one-of-the-most-difficult-pleatues-to-overcome-246420.html

My CR notes - https://gmatclub.com/forum/patterns-in-cr-questions-243450.html

Rest of the Notes coming soon.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2016
Posts: 55
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
WE: Other (Computer Software)
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Oct 2016, 01:24
B is the correct answer

Conclusion: So the President's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Premise: But all of the cancelled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors.

The word identified is important here. Auditors only suggested and shared opinion with president. But final decision of picking or rejecting a certain project was with president.

What if, there were few projects identified as wasteful by the auditors and those projects belonged to presidents legislature. If president cancelled those projects, he is surely a non-partisan. But, if he really did give a go ahead to his own legislature projects (even though, marked as wasteful by auditors), he is a partisan and thus, falsifying conclusion
Intern
Intern
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 30
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2017, 09:41
carcass wrote:
Marcab wrote:
Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?

A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.



B is clearly the answer. The other options go in other directions respect the argument at stake ;)


I have a doubt in B that 90% of the projects were canceled by the president and all canceled were declared wasteful so what to assume in this it already contains 90% of the projects of opposition party which the president canceled

and I read in some post that D is weakening which again I fail to understand how.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Posts: 151
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Operations
GMAT 1: 530 Q45 V20
GPA: 3.91
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Apr 2017, 03:42
souvik101990 wrote:
Marcab wrote:
Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?

A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.


Lets talk numbers!
Lets assume,
No of wasteful project districts=200
President's party districts=110
Opposition districts=90
Now lets say that the president cancelled 100 projects with 90 districts belonging to opposition and 10 of his own (so that it becomes 90%)
Now clearly the president is NOT fair isnt it?
That is exactly what B says!


Hi, I found a problem here.... Don't you think 'B' is saying the opposite that you exemplified above... 'B' is saying 'The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party', so this means these wasteful projects are probably from the districts controlled by opposition party. So, it may be the case that due to the partisan politics those projects are intentionally made wasteful.... thus weakening the argument... Please let me know if I am missing anything......
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 17 Aug 2015
Posts: 123
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Reviews Badge
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2017, 06:11
let's make it WITH very simple language


CRITICS says that president is BIASED because he canceled 90% of the project in the opponents territories

EVIDENCE for the secretary or president support- But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors

SO the missing assumption is that report is not biased- example- let's say report says that 120 projects as waste, most of them- 100 lies in the opponents area, now president cancels 90 of those projects

choice B - The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.

CONCLUSION by secretary is that PRESIDENT IS FAIR and not biased
Expert Post
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 624
Location: India
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jun 2017, 02:17
Marcab wrote:
Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?

A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.

The opposition's claim is that projects which were not wasteful were canceled.

The president is motivated by sound budgetary policy if only the wasteful projects as identified by the auditors, were canceled. Choice B is the needed assumption that would make that true. It says many of the wasteful projects were in districts controlled by opposition.

My view is, we really cannot say this as an assumption because it is a fact that automatically follows from the facts that 90% of the canceled projects were in opposition's districts and the fact of the auditor's report.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Premium Material
Standardized Approaches

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 69
Schools: LBS '18
GMAT 1: 610 Q48 V26
Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Dec 2017, 06:10
pb_india wrote:
Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?

(A) Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.

(B) The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.

(C) The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.

(D) The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.

(E) Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.


This is one of the Critical Reasoning Questions that indulge my senses.
You really need a clear mindset to solve it. And this question is the limit in which only common sense works
.The more you apply" NEGATION TECHNIQUES " or " DEFENDER ASSUMPTION" or " SUPPORTER ASSUMPTION
" techniques , the more time is wasted . And if you solve it in a max time frame situation , Then clearly
its not a win-win situation

Breaking the argument down in simple terms .
Press secretary is just saying that the oppositions are again becoming delusional.
Our President is cleary motivated to save money and not play dirty politics here, tHE PREMISE supporting
it is " WE HAVE A REPORT FROM A NON PARTISAN AUDITOR
Like most Gmat questions this single premise is enough to support the weak reasoning of Press Secretary
((There are so many reasoning errors in the link between premise and conclusion PRIMARY being a APPEAL
FALLACY ERROR (APPEAL TO AUTHORITY- according to which if a famous or an
important person states a thing then that is enough TO JUSTIFY THE CONCLUSION.
Here that important person is the NON PARTISAN AUDITOR. iF you find some ther flaws clearly 3 options
can be removed safely.

I was confused between A and B.
Coming to B . Why is B right - According to B The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.

Consider, if this was not the case , then all cancelled highways will be in the president's nominated area or areas under his control
Now , all these highways which fall in the area that is under President's jurisdiction are cancelled , Then why is opposition still
howling and why is press secretary even concerned to reply them?
All the destruction has happened in President's area .Why must Press Secretary respond to opposition now
for their cancelled projects. He must be a real fool if he does that
But, he is not .He responds to the claims of opposition. He makes an argument that we solve. He gives a conclusion that we can destroy

Hence, the answer.
If still you are confused with any other option , then look for a flaw in the argument and see that are you trying to link your
assumption to that flaw?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Sep 2017
Posts: 10
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Dec 2017, 11:09
what is the press.secre. argument in these question i am confused with it.
Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
G
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1359
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Dec 2017, 21:51
viv007 wrote:
what is the press.secre. argument in these question i am confused with it.

To understand the press secretary's argument, start with the conclusion: "The President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics."

Next, let's walk through the press secretary's reasoning:

  • First, the press secretary describes a claim made by CRITICS of the president's cancellations: "Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties." In other words, the President belongs to party A, and some legislative districts are controlled by parties B, C, and D, for example. According to the critics, the President was motivated by revenge (vengeful) and thus cancelled projects in districts controlled by parties B, C and D.
  • Next, the press secretary presents the evidence used by critics to support their claim that the president was being vengeful: "90 percent of the projects canceled were in {districts controlled by opposition parties}." So of all the projects cancelled by the president, 90 percent were in districts controlled by B, C, and D. Obviously this would be a little suspicious if the president belongs to party A. Did the president cancel those projects to take revenge on the rival parties?
  • The press secretary then states evidence that will be used AGAINST the critics' claim: "all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors." So the critics focused on the parties controlling the districts. The press secretary responds by saying, "Hey, it had nothing to do with the parties. ALL of those projects were identified as wasteful. The projects were cancelled because they were WASTEFUL, not because they were in districts controlled by rival parties." The press secretary does not dispute the FACTS cited by the critics. However, the press secretary does dispute the MOTIVATION.
  • The press secretary thus implies that the president would have cancelled those projects even if they were in districts controlled by A. According to the press secretary, the cancellations were based on waste, not party affiliation.

Hopefully that helps you tackle the answer choices! Remember, you are looking for an assumption on which THAT line of reasoning/conclusion depends. Use process of elimination to consider each choice.

Good luck, and welcome to GMAT Club!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor at www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Friendly warning: I'm bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99... in any section order

YouTube verbal webinars:
"Next-level" GMAT pronouns | Uses of "that" on the GMAT | Parallelism and meaning | Simplifying GMAT verb tenses | Comparisons, part I |
November webinar schedule

Re: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway   [#permalink] 17 Dec 2017, 21:51

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   [ 72 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway

  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®.