Voters commonly condemn politicians for being insincere, but politicians often must disguise their true feelings when they make public statements. If they expressed their honest views—about, say, their party's policies—then achieving politically necessary compromises would be much more difficult. Clearly, the very insincerity that people decry shows that our government is functioning well. Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines this reasoning? (A) Achieving political compromises is not all that is necessary for the proper functioning of a government. (B) Some political compromises are not in the best long-term interest of the government. (C) Voters often judge politicians by criteria other than the sincerity with which they express their views. (D) A political party's policies could turn out to be detrimental to the functioning of a government. (E) Some of the public statements made by politicians about their party's policies could in fact be sincere. Insincere Politicians Step 1: Identify the Question The word undermines indicates that this is a Weaken the Argument question. Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument V: P insincere P must hide feelings Else diff to compromise Ó Insincere à gov functioning well Step 3: Pause and State the Goal On Weaken questions, the correct answer makes the conclusion less likely to be valid. Often on Weaken questions, you will want to attack gaps in the logic of the argument. Do you see any gaps between the premises and conclusion? Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right (A) CORRECT . The premise says that disguising true feelings is needed for compromises, while the conclusion says that insincerity shows that the government is functioning well. These are not the same thing. If things other than compromises are also necessary in order for a government to function well, then the ability to achieve compromises, by itself, does not mean that the government is functioning well overall. (B) The argument states that political compromises are necessary. For this to be the case, not all political compromises need be in the government’s best long-term interest. Moreover, the relationship between a government functioning well and long-term interests is not clear; these two ideas are not necessarily the same thing. (C) The argument states that insincerity is a criterion voters consider. The fact that voters consider other factors as well does not influence the conclusion drawn about insincerity. (D) The conclusion relates to whether compromises promote the functioning of the government. Whether some policies may not help in this functioning does not directly relate to the conclusion. (E) The fact that some statements may be sincere does not diminish the premise that politicians may still be insincere in certain instances. Argument Evaluation Situation Politicians must often make insincere public statements because expressing their true feelings would make it harder for them to achieve politically necessary compromises. Reasoning What would suggest that the argument's premises do not establish that politicians' insincerity shows our government is functioning well? The implicit reasoning is that insincerity helps politicians achieve politically necessary compromises, and these compromises help our government to function well, so insincerity must show that our government is functioning well. Evidence that these necessary compromises do not ensure that our government functions well would undermine the argument's reasoning, as would evidence that politicians' insincerity has other substantial effects that hinder the government's functioning. (A) Correct . If governments may function poorly even when insincerity allows necessary political compromises to be made, then the argument's premises do not establish that politicians' insincerity shows our government is functioning well. (B) The argument does not require that all political compromises help government to function well, only that politically necessary compromises do. (C) Even if voters often judge politicians by criteria other than their sincerity, they may also often decry politicians' insincerity, not realizing or caring that such insincerity helps the government function well. (D) Even if a political party's policies impair the government's functioning, politically necessary compromises by politicians in that party could improve the government's functioning. (E) Even if politicians sometimes speak sincerely about their party's policies, their general willingness to be insincere as needed to achieve politically necessary compromises could be a sign that the government is functioning well.

Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 13:25

It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 13:25

Toolkit

Critical Reasoning (CR)

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Nov 20
UCR MBA Impact - Live Q&A with UCR AdCom & Student
07:30 AM PST
-
08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 22
GMAT RC Masterclass
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Nov 23
Conquer Algebra on the GMAT Focus Edition
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Nov 25
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
10:00 AM EST
-
11:00 AM EST
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.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

Voters commonly condemn politicians for being insincere, but politicia

1 2 3

Noida

Joined: 27 Apr 2021

Last visit: 30 Jul 2024

Posts: 71

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 72

Posts: 71

Kudos: 52

19 Dec 2022, 00:29

Kudos

Bookmarks

Option A says that political compromise is not the only thing that matters for a Functioning government.
But it does matter.

Let’s assume that political compromise contributes to 10% in a functioning government, but other factors caused by insincerity (deceit, lying, corruption) cause a 50% decline in the functioning government.
(These numbers are just for understanding)

So, political compromise is not the only factor that matters. Other factors are also important for a functioning government.

Danish234

Joined: 08 Feb 2022

Last visit: 14 Oct 2025

Posts: 19

Given Kudos: 100

Posts: 19

Kudos: 0

22 May 2023, 08:09

Kudos

Bookmarks

I still don't understand how option D is wrong.
Let me explain how I think of option D.
The conclusion says that the insincerity is sign of wel functioning Government.

And option D says that the government policies could turn out to be detrimental to functioning of the government. In this scenario if the politicians stayed insincere and the bad policy is passed then the functioning of the government will be compromised and thus we can say because the politicians stayed insincere the government is not functioning well and thus weaken the argument that insincerity is not good for the functioning of the government.

Please tell me what mistakes have i made in coming to this conclusion because I cannot see in which way this option could be wrong and thank you in advance

Posted from my mobile device

thelastskybender

Joined: 26 Dec 2022

Last visit: 15 Nov 2025

Posts: 132

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 50

Location: India

Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake

GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36 Verified score

Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake

GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36 Verified score

Posts: 132

Kudos: 75

05 Jun 2023, 01:42

Kudos

Bookmarks

Premise: Insincerity----> achieving politically necessary compromises
Conclusion: insincerity -----> Govt. functioning well.

Bridging the gap
Achieving politically necessary compromises -----> Govt. functioning well. ( Our assumption)
Assumption is also a strengthner. Negation of an assumption or its subset (option A) will act as a weakner.

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

Joined: 13 Aug 2009

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 7,443

Own Kudos:

69,787

[1]

Given Kudos: 2,060

Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors

Location: United States (CO)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 Verified score

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 7,443

Kudos: 69,787

[1]

17 Jun 2023, 13:22

Kudos

Bookmarks

Danish234

I still don't understand how option D is wrong.

Let me explain how I think of option D.

The conclusion says that the insincerity is sign of wel functioning Government.

And option D says that the government policies could turn out to be detrimental to functioning of the government. In this scenario if the politicians stayed insincere and the bad policy is passed then the functioning of the government will be compromised and thus we can say because the politicians stayed insincere the government is not functioning well and thus weaken the argument that insincerity is not good for the functioning of the government.

Please tell me what mistakes have i made in coming to this conclusion because I cannot see in which way this option could be wrong and thank you in advance

Posted from my mobile device

To see why (D) is wrong, let's start by breaking down the passage.

The argument concludes that "the very insincerity that people decry shows that our government is functioning well." In other words, the fact that politicians are behaving insincerely demonstrates that the government is functioning well. Why? Because sincerity would make necessary political compromises more difficult.

Let's now consider (D):

Quote:

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines this reasoning?

(D) A political party's policies could turn out to be detrimental to the functioning of a government.

Does this weaken the conclusion that insincerity shows that the government is functioning well? Well, that would require a few leaps.

First, we'd need to assume that compromise allows a political party to enact its policies. Yet we really don't know if that's the case -- perhaps compromise would impede a political party from enacting its policies, since they might have to settle for some compromise that was different from their preferred policy? Either way, we don't have a direct link from "compromise" to a party enacting its policies.

Second, we'd need to assume that the enacted policies actually are detrimental. But notice the argument only says the policies "could turn out to be" detrimental -- not that they are always detrimental.

For both those reasons, (D) does a pretty weak job of undermining the reasoning, and we can eliminate it.

I hope that helps!

PReciSioN

Joined: 17 Dec 2023

Last visit: 14 Apr 2025

Posts: 95

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 47

Location: India

GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88 Verified score

Posts: 95

Kudos: 77

16 Apr 2024, 09:19

Kudos

Bookmarks

avigutman

jabhatta2

Hi avigutman - what if (A) was saying this instead

Quote:

(A-original) Achieving political compromises is not all that is necessary for the proper functioning of a government.

(A-variant) Achieving political compromises is not ~~all that is~~ necessary for the proper functioning of a government.

I believe (A-variant) too would weaken the argument.

If Achieving political compromises is NOT NECESSARY for the proper functioning of a government - i think that would weaken the conclusion

Agreed. jabhatta2. The argument assumes that the proper functioning of a government requires only political compromises.
(A-original) weakens that assumption directly.
(A-variant) weakens that assumption as well (arguably even more so than (A-original) does.)

avigutman , Actually I disagree Avi.

The conclusion is essentially political compromises show (are sufficient for) the well-functioning of a government. This doesn't mean that they have to be necessary. They could be not necessary and sufficient at the same time. (Maybe there are other ways of making a government function well without any political compromises). But if they were not all that is necessary (original option-A), this effectively means that they are not sufficient and so our conclusion is weakened.

avigutman

Tutor

Joined: 17 Jul 2019

Last visit: 30 Sep 2025

Posts: 1,293

Own Kudos:

1,931

Given Kudos: 66

Location: Canada

Schools: NYU Stern (WA)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45 Verified score

GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47 Verified score

GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

Schools: NYU Stern (WA)

GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45 Verified score

Posts: 1,293

Kudos: 1,931

16 Apr 2024, 10:48

Kudos

Bookmarks

PReciSioN

@PReciSioN The argument is completely lacking any connection between the difficulty level of achieving politically necessary compromises and the proper functioning of a government. That connection is assumed. So, any answer choice that undermines that connection is undermining the reasoning.

PReciSioN

Joined: 17 Dec 2023

Last visit: 14 Apr 2025

Posts: 95

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 47

Location: India

GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88 Verified score

Posts: 95

Kudos: 77

16 Apr 2024, 23:32

Kudos

Bookmarks

avigutman

PReciSioN

I see avigutman . Thanks for the explanation!!

agrasan

Joined: 18 Jan 2024

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 534

Own Kudos:

130

Given Kudos: 5,193

Location: India

Products:

Posts: 534

Kudos: 130

11 Mar 2025, 11:33

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hi experts KarishmaB GMATNinja

Can we reject option C on the basis of following reasoning?
"Voters often judge politicians by criteria other than the sincerity with which they express their views."
Others factors = Z
In a nutshell, option C means that voters also consider Z for their opinion on politicians and ultimately, the well functioning of government.

The conclusion says that X leads to Y where X is "insincerity that people decry" and Y is "government is functioning well", this means that X is sufficient for Y.

By knowing that Z can also lead to Y doesn't affect out confidence in the conclusion X --> Y.
Please correct me if my logic is wrong somewhere.

KarishmaB

Tutor

Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 16,267

Own Kudos:

77,000

Given Kudos: 482

Location: Pune, India

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 16,267

Kudos: 77,000

11 Mar 2025, 21:56

Kudos

Bookmarks

agrasan

Option (C) is incorrect because it is irrelevant. Our argument is discussing what shows the govt is functioning well.
Option (C) talks about how voters judge the politicians, on what basis. That is irrelevant. We are not interested in the opinions of the voters. The first line of the argument mentions it only to introduce the topic. The actual argument is not about that at all.
The point is whether the politician's insincerity (taken to exist) shows that the govt is functioning well.

Focus on the crux of the argument to save time in CR.