Thebestway wrote:
Hello everyone,
I chose A, because choice D) weakens the premise "survey respondents may have been biased in favor of Lopez"
From what I understand it is usually wrong when an answer weakens premise as it is supposed to weaken author's assumption.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
ThebestwayTake a look at the question again.
AshutoshB wrote:
Viewers surveyed immediately after the televised political debate last year between Lopez and Tanner tended to think that Lopez had made the better arguments, but the survey respondents who reported that Lopez's arguments were better may have been biased in favor of Lopez. After all, Lopez eventually did win the election.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
(A) Most people who voted in the election that Lopez won did not watch the debate.
(B) Most people in the live audience watching the debate who were surveyed immediately afterward said that they thought that Tanner was more persuasive in the debate than was Lopez.
(C) The people who watched the televised debate were more likely to vote for Tanner than were the people who did not watch the debate.
(D) Most of the viewers surveyed immediately prior to the debate said that they would probably vote for Tanner.
(E) Lopez won the election over Tanner by a very narrow margin.
A - Later upon whatever happens - Lopez wins or loses - it does not matter since the reasoning given for Lopez having made the better arguments in the debate is limited in scope in that it covers the scope until debate. So, it is not relevant to discuss who won election. Note that this is not a blanket statement to be followed for other choice as A is presented so that we can claim such a statement.
Coming to your question, I guess you are unnecessarily making things complex here. You need to just weaken the assumption or provide an external input that makes the reasoning unreasonable. Prior to debate with most of the surveyed participants being against Lopez turning upon in his/her favour later only shows his/her debate skills being better in that specific debate, thus eliminating the bias which was claimed in the passage.
Premise is what author is setting up of which his OR premise assumption is a part. You need to relook how a passage is constructed, better refer GMATNinja's videos.
Hope i understood your query well and answered it.
HTH.