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

It is currently 23 Aug 2019, 19:59

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

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

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 57281
The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Feb 2019, 03:09
1
7
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

64% (02:11) correct 36% (02:18) wrong based on 121 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
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 57281
Re: The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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.
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Feb 2019
Posts: 23
CAT Tests
The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Aug 2019, 11:28
These elected officials are less prone to compromise, and this creates an unnecessary and harmful divide between parties.

What does the above bolded part mean in this context?
Can someone explain?

Thanks :)
GMAT Club Bot
The process of “gerrymandering,” or manipulating voter-district bounda   [#permalink] 03 Aug 2019, 11:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by

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

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne