Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2212:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 1612:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
You’re first to know: Save $200 on GMAT prep starting tomorrow, 4/13. Get 6 official practice tests and study with real questions. Be ready to save!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
05 Jul 2019, 21:26
Kudos
Bookmarks
Historian: The Land Party achieved its only national victory in Banestria in 1935. It received most of its support that year in rural and semirural areas, where the bulk of Banestria’s population lived at the time. The economic woes of the years surrounding that election hit agricultural and small business interests the hardest, and the Land Party specifically targeted those groups in 1935. I conclude that the success of the Land Party that year was due to the combination of the Land Party’s specifically addressing the concerns of these groups and the depth of the economic problems people in these groups were facing.
Each of the following, if true, strengthens the historian’s argument EXCEPT:
Analysis: strengthenX type question
conclusion: LP won because LP addressed the concerns of rural & semi-rural people & at the same time bad economy
premises: economy was bad in agriculture & small business & LP targeted those people and LP received support from rural & semirural people
(A) In preceding elections the Land Party made no attempt to address the interests of economically distressed urban groups. --> correct: whether LP addressed urban issues has no impact on the win
(B) Voters are more likely to vote for a political party that focuses on their problems. --> strengthen: LP focuses on the rural & semirural ppl's problems, so they voted & LP won
(C) The Land Party had most of its successes when there was economic distress in the agricultural sector. --> strengthen: there was economic problem in agricultural sector, so it strengthen the conclusion
(D) No other major party in Banestria specifically addressed the issues of people who lived in semirural areas in 1935. --> strengthen: if other party also do the same, then voters would be shared, so can't say that the wi was because of addressing the rural & semirural ppl's problems by LP
(E) The greater the degree of economic distress someone is in, the more likely that person is to vote--> strengthen: it supports the conclusion because it says that economic distress is the one of the cause they voted
Each of the following, if true, strengthens the historian’s argument EXCEPT:
Analysis: strengthenX type question
conclusion: LP won because LP addressed the concerns of rural & semi-rural people & at the same time bad economy
premises: economy was bad in agriculture & small business & LP targeted those people and LP received support from rural & semirural people
(A) In preceding elections the Land Party made no attempt to address the interests of economically distressed urban groups. --> correct: whether LP addressed urban issues has no impact on the win
(B) Voters are more likely to vote for a political party that focuses on their problems. --> strengthen: LP focuses on the rural & semirural ppl's problems, so they voted & LP won
(C) The Land Party had most of its successes when there was economic distress in the agricultural sector. --> strengthen: there was economic problem in agricultural sector, so it strengthen the conclusion
(D) No other major party in Banestria specifically addressed the issues of people who lived in semirural areas in 1935. --> strengthen: if other party also do the same, then voters would be shared, so can't say that the wi was because of addressing the rural & semirural ppl's problems by LP
(E) The greater the degree of economic distress someone is in, the more likely that person is to vote--> strengthen: it supports the conclusion because it says that economic distress is the one of the cause they voted
26 Jan 2022, 07:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
How A is correct? As per argument , the only victory party had was in the year 1935,because the party addressed the issues of economically distressed people. So option A strengthens this argument by stating that the party did not focus on the issues of people in preceding election and as a result lost it . Remember that party won only once so we can safely assume that party lost the election.
Since we are looking for options which do not strengthen. Hence A can't be the answer. Let me know where I am wrong.
Since we are looking for options which do not strengthen. Hence A can't be the answer. Let me know where I am wrong.
26 Jan 2022, 09:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
akt715
This is an EXCEPT Question. We have to find an argumetn which do not strengthen the arugment
Argument made is
LP won in 1935 election because it focused on rural and semirural areas where people were most affected by economic woes. These people did agriculture and small business
(A) In preceding elections the Land Party made no attempt to address the interests of economically distressed urban groups. --> This does not affect the conclusion as the argument is about LP focussing on rural and semirural areas and NOT ubran groups --> CORRECT answer
(B) Voters are more likely to vote for a political party that focuses on their problems.--> If a party supports their cause and they vote for it, This means if LP concentrates on problems of rural and semirural, people will support them --> This supports the argument --> EXCEPT question --> Wrong
(C) The Land Party had most of its successes when there was economic distress in the agricultural sector. --> this is what is said in argument --> strengthens --> WRong
(D) No other major party in Banestria specifically addressed the issues of people who lived in semirural areas in 1935. --> if no other party addressed this issue, then LP was the only major party who addressed it and hence got votes --> Strenthens --> Wrong
(E) The greater the degree of economic distress someone is in, the more likely that person is to vote --> rural and semirural were in distress and so they voted --> and they will vote the party who they think will help them --> strengthens --> Wrong
