An increased number of candidates running for a political position, on

Question

An increased number of candidates running for a political position, one opinion says, is likely to raise the percentage of voters. The larger the number of candidates who run for a given position, the better the chances that a voter will find a candidate that adequately represents his or her political opinions. In the reality of the political world, however, the opposite is likely to be the case. As more candidates enter the election process, the differences between their declared positions on political matters tend to become less obvious.

in first case, opinion was: likely to raise the percentage of voters and the boldface part is the explanation of the opinion.
in second case, opinion was: the opposite is likely to be the case, here "AS" is used to explain the second opinion which contradicts the first one.

answer should be E

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second further supports that opinion by elaborating on the explanation.

The first raises an opinion, and the second raises another opinion contrary to the first opinion.

The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second raises another opinion contrary to the first opinion.

The first raises an opinion, and the second supplies evidence that supports that opinion.

The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second undermines that opinion by contradicting the explanation.

sayantanc2k · Accepted Answer

1st sentence: an opinion
2nd sentence: explanation supporting the opinion.
3rd sentence: counter-opinion
4th sentence: explanation supporting the counter-opinion.

The second highlighted part is not an opinion but an explanation for the counter-opinion. Hence option E is better than option C.

InstantMBA · Answer

In   my   opinion:

good : (C) The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second raises another opinion contrary to the first opinion.

better : (E) The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second undermines that opinion by contradicting the explanation.

answer: E

manhasnoname · Answer

I don't see anything wrong with (C).

Second bold phrase is another opinion and it is contrary to the first opinion.

Experts please help!!

abhi4212 · Answer

An increased number of candidates running for a political position, one opinion says, is likely to raise the percentage of voters. The larger the number of candidates who run for a given position, the better the chances that a voter will find a candidate that adequately represents his or her political opinions. In the reality of the political world, however, the opposite is likely to be the case. As more candidates enter the election process, the differences between their declared positions on political matters tend to become less obvious.

in first case, opinion was: likely to raise the percentage of voters and the boldface part is the explanation of the opinion.
in second case, opinion was: the opposite is likely to be the case, here "AS" is used to explain the second opinion which contradicts the first one.

answer should be E

in first case, opinion was:  likely to raise the percentage of voters  and the boldface part is the  explanation of the opinion .
in second case, opinion was:  the opposite is likely to be the case , here " AS " is used to explain the  second opinion which contradicts the first one.

answer should be  E

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

You have to read the answer options quite literally -

"The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second raises another opinion contrary to the first opinion."

the first boldface explains an opinion. that opinion = "An increased number of candidates running for a political position, one opinion says, is likely to raise the percentage of voters."

the second boldface  - "the differences between their declared positions on political matters tend to become less obvious" is not directly contrary to 
 the first opinion  - "likely to raise the percentage of voters".

Option E does a much better job by stating that 
 second boldface -  "the differences between their declared positions on political matters tend to become less obvious"  contradicts the  
 first boldface  - "the better the chances that a voter will find a candidate that adequately represents his or her political opinions."

Moreover, I think that the two boldfaces state opinions, but state facts.

Hence, E is the better choice.

anothermillenial · Answer

(Counter-conclusion) An increased number of candidates running for a political position, one opinion says, is likely to raise the percentage of voters.

(Counter-premise)  The larger the number of candidates who run for a given position, the better the chances that a voter will find a candidate that adequately represents his or her political opinions.

(Conclusion - which makes the prior conclusion and premise counterpoints) In the reality of the political world, however, the opposite is likely to be the case.

(Premise)  As more candidates enter the election process, the differences between their declared positions on political matters tend to become less obvious.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second further supports that opinion by elaborating on the explanation. 
 The first half is true, but the second half of this answer choice is false. The second premise does not support “that   opinion”. We’re looking for an answer choice that expresses that both bold face statements are on “opposite” sides.

(B) The first raises an opinion, and the second raises another opinion contrary to the first opinion. 
 I suppose the counter-premise is some sort of opinion….and the second is could be as well....and they are "contrary".... Keep for now! Now looking at (E), the bold-face statements are definitely more likely explanations (and factual support) of the non-bolded opinions.

(C) The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second raises another opinion contrary to the first opinion. 
 Hm, the first is definitely an explanation of the counter-conclusion opinion. Does the second raise another opinion? No, the opinion is: “the opposite is likely to be the case.”

(D) The first raises an opinion, and the second supplies evidence that supports that opinion. 
 Hm….the second definitely is not “evidence” that supports the first opinion. This answer choice is not expressing that the bold face statements are on “opposite” sides.
 
(E) The first explains an opinion that was raised, and the second undermines that opinion by contradicting the explanation.
 The first half is true (definitely better than B) and the correctly expresses the “opposite” site factor we’re looking for. Correct!

prateekchugh · Answer

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Step 1: Identify the Question Type 
Any question that asks us to identify the roles played by statements in boldface is a Bolded Statement
question. Our task is to find the structure of the stimulus and to determine the structural functions
of the statements in bold type.

Step 2: Untangle the Stimulus 
This stimulus includes two contradictory opinions: the author’s opinion, stated in the third sentence,
and the “one opinion” the author is arguing against (we’ll call this the opponent’s opinion),
stated in the first sentence. The opponent believes that the more candidates there are running for
office, the more voters will turn out at the polls. The first bolded statement serves as the opponent’s
evidence: More voters will turn out because the more candidates there are, the more likely voters
are to find one they like and consequently want to vote for. The author counters the opponent,
implying that in actual practice, the more candidates there are, the fewer voters will turn out. The
second bolded statement serves as the author’s evidence: The more candidates there are, the more
alike they all look to voters.

Step 3: Predict the Answer 
Both bolded statements, then, are evidence—the first for the opponent’s position and the second
for the author’s.

Step 4: Evaluate the Choices 
(E) matches our prediction, though the wording of this choice makes it a bit tricky. The first bolded
statement definitely explains why the opponent holds the position he does. So far, so good. We
know that the second bolded statement is the author’s evidence. Because the author is contradicting
the opponent, the author’s evidence does in fact serve to “undermine” the opponent’s view.
Finally, the second bolded statement directly contradicts the first bolded statement. The first says
that the more candidates there are, the more likely a voter will be to find one she likes. The second
says that the more candidates there are, the more similar they start to seem, which implies that
it will be more difficult for voters to find candidates they like. It follows that the final piece of
choice (E), “by contradicting  ,” is also correct and (E) is the correct
answer. (A) is incorrect because the second bolded statement supports the author’s view, not the
opponent’s. (B) is incorrect because both bolded statements are evidence for an opinion, not the
opinion itself. (C) is incorrect because the second statement is, again, evidence for an opinion, not
the opinion itself. (D) is incorrect because the first bolded statement is evidence, and the second is
evidence for the author, not the opponent. Choice (E) is correct.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

An increased number of candidates running for a political position, on

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

An increased number of candidates running for a political position, on

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards