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

 It is currently 21 Mar 2019, 01:01

### 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

# The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 53748
The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2019, 03:09
1
3
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

64% (02:16) correct 36% (02:17) wrong based on 58 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district boundaries so that one party gains a considerable advantage in a district over another, is making the modern political climate more divisive than ever. It ensures that people with likeminded ideals end up densely packed in the same districts, and those people then elect officials who also share those likeminded ideals. These elected officials are less prone to compromise, and this creates an unnecessary and harmful divide between parties.

Assuming all the following statements are true, which would most significantly weaken the argument made above?

(A) Gerrymandering sets up an unfair advantage by creating some districts that are nearly guaranteed to vote for a particular party, thereby freeing up more time and resources for that party to campaign elsewhere.

(B) People with likeminded ideals have an innate desire to live alongside others who share similar belief systems, regardless of their political affiliation.

(C) All elected officials are typically strong in their convictions.

(D) When people with likeminded ideals live in the same district, they tend to continuously elect politicians with very similar beliefs.

(E) Gerrymandering can be executed by both political parties.

_________________
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 53748
Re: The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Feb 2019, 01:52
Bunuel wrote:
The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district boundaries so that one party gains a considerable advantage in a district over another, is making the modern political climate more divisive than ever. It ensures that people with likeminded ideals end up densely packed in the same districts, and those people then elect officials who also share those likeminded ideals. These elected officials are less prone to compromise, and this creates an unnecessary and harmful divide between parties.

Assuming all the following statements are true, which would most significantly weaken the argument made above?

(A) Gerrymandering sets up an unfair advantage by creating some districts that are nearly guaranteed to vote for a particular party, thereby freeing up more time and resources for that party to campaign elsewhere.

(B) People with likeminded ideals have an innate desire to live alongside others who share similar belief systems, regardless of their political affiliation.

(C) All elected officials are typically strong in their convictions.

(D) When people with likeminded ideals live in the same district, they tend to continuously elect politicians with very similar beliefs.

(E) Gerrymandering can be executed by both political parties.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

B. Choice (A) sounds more like an additional argument in favor of gerrymandering creating an “unnecessary and harmful divide between parties,” so that answer can’t be right since it strengthens rather than weakens the original argument. The same can be said for Choice (D); if folks are electing very similar politicians in their districts and those politicians share the same ideals, this would likely contribute to the divide between parties and help eliminate the political “middle.” Choice (E) is irrelevant; that both sides can take part in gerrymandering doesn’t mean they do or that they do at the same time. So, that argument also falls flat. You’ve narrowed the options down to either Choice (B) or (C). Of the two, Choice (B) is the stronger option. It presents an alternative to gerrymandering as the reason that certain districts tend to elect people from the same party over and over again, which arguably contributes to a sharper divide between parties. Choice (B) is your best bet.
_________________
Re: The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda   [#permalink] 27 Feb 2019, 01:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by