Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

It is currently 26 May 2017, 08:56

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election

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

Hide Tags

2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 359
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 212 [2] , given: 16

Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Sep 2009, 04:40
2
This post received
KUDOS
30
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

24% (03:51) correct 76% (02:25) wrong based on 1139 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election and voters blame the scandal on all parties about equally, virtually all incumbents, from whatever party, seeking reelection are returned to office. However, when voters blame such a scandal on only one party, incumbents from that party are likely to be defeated by challengers from other parties. The proportion of incumbents who seek reelection is high and remarkably constant from election to election.

If the voters’ reactions are guided by a principle, which one of the following principles would best account for the contrast in reactions described above?

(A) Whenever one incumbent is responsible for one major political scandal and another incumbent is responsible for another, the consequences for the two incumbents should be the same.
(B) When a major political scandal is blamed on incumbents from all parties, that judgment is more accurate than any judgment that incumbents from only on party are to blame.
(C) Incumbents who are rightly blamed for a major political scandal should not seek reelection, but if they do, they should not be returned to office.
(D) Major political scandals can practically always be blamed on incumbents, but whether those incumbents should be voted out of office depends on who their challengers are.
(E) When major political scandals are less the responsibility of individual incumbents than of the parties to which they belong, whatever party was responsible must be penalized when possible.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Lahoosaher


Last edited by MacFauz on 16 Mar 2014, 06:14, edited 1 time in total.
Added OA
Request Expert Reply
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 359
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 212 [0], given: 16

Re: CR : voters’ reactions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Sep 2009, 04:43
IMO E.

Other options go beyond the scope.
Could someone please explain the meaning of below phrases. I did not know the meaning and initially felt that the question was very difficult.

to seek reelection - does this mean that the incumbent seeks for reelection after he has lost one?
returned to office - :(
_________________

Lahoosaher

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 3

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: CR : voters’ reactions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Sep 2009, 12:12
amolsk11 wrote:
IMO E.

Other options go beyond the scope.
Could someone please explain the meaning of below phrases. I did not know the meaning and initially felt that the question was very difficult.

to seek reelection - does this mean that the incumbent seeks for reelection after he has lost one?
returned to office - :(



Seeking reelection means the incumbent who is currently in office wants to serve another term.

Returned to office means that they have been re-elected.


I also agree with you that the answer is E.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 359
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 212 [0], given: 16

Re: CR : voters’ reactions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2009, 00:42
Thanks a lot for the explanation Lincfucious.
OA is E.
_________________

Lahoosaher

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Oct 2008
Posts: 601
Location: Kolkata,India
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 902 [0], given: 100

Re: CR : voters’ reactions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Oct 2009, 17:00
COuld somebody please explain?
B>eliminate.Nobody is talking about accuracy.
D>eliminate.Dependence on challengers.
C>goes against.Eliminate.

Please explain A and E
_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/countdown-beginshas-ended-85483-40.html#p649902

VP
VP
avatar
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1334
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 254 [0], given: 10

Re: CR : voters’ reactions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 May 2011, 04:31
Made a judgement error in this.
Between D and E,picked up D instead since all the incumbents were involved in scandal was an assumption I made.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Bunuel's fan!
Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Posts: 233
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 55

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2012, 06:17
I picked A and could not quite understand why it was E. Can anyone explain, please
6 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Affiliations: Project Management Professional (PMP)
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 209
Location: New Delhi, India
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 74 [6] , given: 12

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2012, 06:31
6
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
gmatfighter12 wrote:
I picked A and could not quite understand why it was E. Can anyone explain, please

'Parts of the Whole' method is used to test on many different question types. If you spot it fast enough, the answers are very straightforward. The spotting here is that an incumbent is member (part) of a party (whole). If you've done this, just ask yourself these 2 questions:

If a certain Part has an attribute, is it necessary that the Whole has it?
If the Whole has a quality, is it necessary that each part has it?

Since the stimulus is a principle q, voters seem to adhere to q1 above and hence answer E.

You can use sports as a 'Parts of the Whole' analogy to see this: Phillies is the best team in the MLB. Therefore all its pitchers are the best pitchers in MLB. Is that logically right?
_________________

Best
Vaibhav

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, Thanks

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 197
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 22

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2012, 08:01
narangvaibhav - Thank you very much for the explanation. It is extremely useful.
2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Bunuel's fan!
Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Posts: 233
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 47 [2] , given: 55

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2012, 08:50
2
This post received
KUDOS
Thanks for the answer. The reason why I had a hard time was the meaning of E. I could not quite understand what it is saying. And I found this


(E) When major political scandals are less the responsibility of individual incumbents than of the parties to which they belong,(scandal is blamed on the party, not the incumbent) whatever party was responsible must be penalized when possible (but if both are responsible then the incumbent will not necessarily be penalized).

http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =6&t=44835
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10367
Followers: 999

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Dec 2015, 12:05
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 60
WE: Design (Aerospace and Defense)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 7

Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2015, 04:57
Quote:
Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election and voters blame the scandal on all parties about equally, virtually all incumbents, from whatever party, seeking reelection are returned to office. However, when voters blame such a scandal on only one party, incumbents from that party are likely to be defeated by challengers from other parties. The proportion of incumbents who seek reelection is high and remarkably constant from election to election.

If the voters’ reactions are guided by a principle, which one of the following principles would best account for the contrast in reactions described above?

(A) Whenever one incumbent is responsible for one major political scandal and another incumbent is responsible for another, the consequences for the two incumbents should be the same.
(B) When a major political scandal is blamed on incumbents from all parties, that judgment is more accurate than any judgment that incumbents from only on party are to blame.
(C) Incumbents who are rightly blamed for a major political scandal should not seek reelection, but if they do, they should not be returned to office.
(D) Major political scandals can practically always be blamed on incumbents, but whether those incumbents should be voted out of office depends on who their challengers are.
(E) When major political scandals are less the responsibility of individual incumbents than of the parties to which they belong, whatever party was responsible must be penalized when possible.


From the question what I understand is when both parties are involved, it is unlikely that the challenging party will be elected. But if only one party is involved in the scandal, then the likelihood of other party winning is more. Question stem is asking “best account for the contrast in reactions described above?” . How E is substantiating that contrast.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 22 Sep 2014
Posts: 18
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2015, 14:26
E supports the 2nd part.... if only one party is involved in the scandal, then the likelihood of other party winning is more

but does it support the 1st part also ???? when both parties are involved, it is unlikely that the challenging party will be elected.
Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Jamboree GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Status: GMAT Expert
Affiliations: Jamboree Education Pvt Ltd
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 286
Location: India
Followers: 77

Kudos [?]: 275 [2] , given: 1

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Dec 2015, 22:23
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
The argument says that when all parties are involved in the scandal no particular member of any party suffers the consequences but when a single party is involved the incumbents belonging to that party suffers defeat in the hand of the challengers."E" says that an incumbent is the member of a party. If the party is scandalised it does not imply each and every single incumbent is involved in the scandal or vice versa if the incumbent is to be blamed for the scandal then since the incumbent is the part of a party the whole party takes the responsibility.
_________________

Aryama Dutta Saikia
Jamboree Education Pvt. Ltd.

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 135
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 25

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2017, 14:14
It seems this question should be rated at <700
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 20
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 148

CAT Tests
Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2017, 22:04
hello experts,

kindly help us with the above question
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Posts: 7
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 27

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Mar 2017, 22:47
can somebody explain the question ?
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 14 Oct 2012
Posts: 126
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 820

Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 May 2017, 21:16
My 2 cents:
Whole (party scandal) ----x---> Party’s individual members
Individual member (scandal) ---> Party’s ALL members
So what happens to whole DOES NOT impact the part i.e. individual members BUT what happens to part DOES impact the whole i.e. ALL the members of party.
ONLY E resembles this condition!!!
Expert Post
Top Contributor
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 494
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Followers: 151

Kudos [?]: 373 [0], given: 189

CAT Tests
Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 May 2017, 14:35
Expert's post
Top Contributor
Quote:
can somebody explain the question ?

Let's say that the mayor of a town always belongs to one of three political parties: X, Y, or Z. The town holds an election every year, voting either to keep the incumbent mayor (if that mayor runs for reelection) or to elect a new mayor.
Quote:
Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election and voters blame the scandal on all parties about equally, virtually all incumbents, from whatever party, seeking reelection are returned to office.

(Scenario 1): According to this statement, if a major political scandal erupts before one of the annual elections and voters blame the scandal on all three parties about equally, then the incumbent mayor, if seeking reelection, will almost certainly win the election, regardless of the mayor's political party affiliation. In other words, even though the incumbent belongs to a party that is equally blamed for the scandal, the incumbent and his/her party do not suffer negative political consequences.
Quote:
However, when voters blame such a scandal on only one party, incumbents from that party are likely to be defeated by challengers from other parties.

(Scenario 2): If the current mayor belongs to Party X, and voters blame the scandal on Party X, the current mayor, if seeking reelection, is likely to be defeated by a challenger from Party Y or Party Z. In other words, when the incumbent's party is the ONLY party blamed, the incumbent and his/her party DO suffer negative political consequences.

Now on to the question stem:
Quote:
If the voters’ reactions are guided by a principle, which one of the following principles would best account for the contrast in reactions described above?

The "voters' reactions" are described in the first two sentences: scenario 1) when voters blame a pre-election scandal on all parties equally, the incumbent usually wins, and scenario 2) when voters blame a pre-election scandal on the party of the incumbent, the incumbent usually loses. If we are told that those reactions are guided by a principle, which principle would best account for the contrast in those reactions?
Quote:
(A) Whenever one incumbent is responsible for one major political scandal and another incumbent is responsible for another, the consequences for the two incumbents should be the same.

The argument in the passage does not discuss how the voters would react if one incumbent were responsible for one major scandal and another incumbent were responsible for another. Choice (A) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(B) When a major political scandal is blamed on incumbents from all parties, that judgment is more accurate than any judgment that incumbents from only on party are to blame.

We are looking for a principle that accounts for the contrast in the voters' reactions (scenario 1 vs scenario 2), and we don't care whether the judgment on which one reaction is based is more accurate than the judgment on which the other is based. Choice (B) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(C) Incumbents who are rightly blamed for a major political scandal should not seek reelection, but if they do, they should not be returned to office.

First, the passage does not consider whether incumbents blamed for a major political scandal should or should not seek reelection. Second, choice (C) only explains the voters' reaction in scenario 2 and does NOT explain the contrast in those reactions. Choice (C) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(D) Major political scandals can practically always be blamed on incumbents, but whether those incumbents should be voted out of office depends on who their challengers are.

This statement does not align with the information in the passage. According to the passage, if incumbents (and hence their parties) are blamed for a pre-election scandal, those incumbents will most likely lose the election, regardless of "who their challengers are." Choice (D) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(E) When major political scandals are less the responsibility of individual incumbents than of the parties to which they belong, whatever party was responsible must be penalized when possible.

First, apply this principle to scenario 2 (the incumbent's party--Party X, for example--receives all of the blame): in that case, Party X can easily be penalized by voting for someone in Party Y or Party Z. Now, consider scenario 1 (for example, the incumbent belongs to Party X but Parties X, Y, and Z all receive equal blame): if we follow the principle in statement (E), we should penalize ALL parties. If we vote for someone in Party Y or Z, one of those parties is rewarded while party X is penalized. There is no way to penalize all parties equally since a member of one of the parties has to win. In that case, the voters might just stick with the default option (the incumbent). Thus, choice (E) is the best choice.
_________________

www.gmatninja.com + blog

Join us for the verbal experts' live chat every Wednesday, 8 am PST/8:30 pm IST! Details available here.

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and then please be specific about your question for us. Feel free to mention GMATNinja and GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

Rules for posting in verbal forum | How to use search function (before posting questions!)

GMAT Club's ultimate verbal study plan, 2017 edition

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 135
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 25

Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 May 2017, 13:11
GMATNinja wrote:
Quote:
can somebody explain the question ?

Let's say that the mayor of a town always belongs to one of three political parties: X, Y, or Z. The town holds an election every year, voting either to keep the incumbent mayor (if that mayor runs for reelection) or to elect a new mayor.
Quote:
Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election and voters blame the scandal on all parties about equally, virtually all incumbents, from whatever party, seeking reelection are returned to office.

(Scenario 1): According to this statement, if a major political scandal erupts before one of the annual elections and voters blame the scandal on all three parties about equally, then the incumbent mayor, if seeking reelection, will almost certainly win the election, regardless of the mayor's political party affiliation. In other words, even though the incumbent belongs to a party that is equally blamed for the scandal, the incumbent and his/her party do not suffer negative political consequences.
Quote:
However, when voters blame such a scandal on only one party, incumbents from that party are likely to be defeated by challengers from other parties.

(Scenario 2): If the current mayor belongs to Party X, and voters blame the scandal on Party X, the current mayor, if seeking reelection, is likely to be defeated by a challenger from Party Y or Party Z. In other words, when the incumbent's party is the ONLY party blamed, the incumbent and his/her party DO suffer negative political consequences.


Now on to the question stem:
Quote:
If the voters’ reactions are guided by a principle, which one of the following principles would best account for the contrast in reactions described above?

The "voters' reactions" are described in the first two sentences: scenario 1) when voters blame a pre-election scandal on all parties equally, the incumbent usually wins, and scenario 2) when voters blame a pre-election scandal on the party of the incumbent, the incumbent usually loses. If we are told that those reactions are guided by a principle, which principle would best account for the contrast in those reactions?
Quote:
(A) Whenever one incumbent is responsible for one major political scandal and another incumbent is responsible for another, the consequences for the two incumbents should be the same.

The argument in the passage does not discuss how the voters would react if one incumbent were responsible for one major scandal and another incumbent were responsible for another. Choice (A) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(B) When a major political scandal is blamed on incumbents from all parties, that judgment is more accurate than any judgment that incumbents from only on party are to blame.

We are looking for a principle that accounts for the contrast in the voters' reactions (scenario 1 vs scenario 2), and we don't care whether the judgment on which one reaction is based is more accurate than the judgment on which the other is based. Choice (B) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(C) Incumbents who are rightly blamed for a major political scandal should not seek reelection, but if they do, they should not be returned to office.

First, the passage does not consider whether incumbents blamed for a major political scandal should or should not seek reelection. Second, choice (C) only explains the voters' reaction in scenario 2 and does NOT explain the contrast in those reactions. Choice (C) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(D) Major political scandals can practically always be blamed on incumbents, but whether those incumbents should be voted out of office depends on who their challengers are.

This statement does not align with the information in the passage. According to the passage, if incumbents (and hence their parties) are blamed for a pre-election scandal, those incumbents will most likely lose the election, regardless of "who their challengers are." Choice (D) can be eliminated.
Quote:
(E) When major political scandals are less the responsibility of individual incumbents than of the parties to which they belong, whatever party was responsible must be penalized when possible.

First, apply this principle to scenario 2 (the incumbent's party--Party X, for example--receives all of the blame): in that case, Party X can easily be penalized by voting for someone in Party Y or Party Z. Now, consider scenario 1 (for example, the incumbent belongs to Party X but Parties X, Y, and Z all receive equal blame): if we follow the principle in statement (E), we should penalize ALL parties. If we vote for someone in Party Y or Z, one of those parties is rewarded while party X is penalized. There is no way to penalize all parties equally since a member of one of the parties has to win. In that case, the voters might just stick with the default option (the incumbent). Thus, choice (E) is the best choice.


hello, since you are verbal expert in Gmat, you definitely know how to interpret all the options in less than 2 mins. I really want to know how you do that. It would be great for me to master the skills in verbal section.
Re: Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election   [#permalink] 14 May 2017, 13:11
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Whenever a major political scandal erupts nahid78 2 26 Apr 2017, 12:24
5 Whenever a major political scandal occurs in Pauly County it riskietech 5 02 Mar 2016, 20:03
4 Whenever a major airplane accident occurs, there is a Aristocrat 7 02 Jul 2015, 09:01
Whenever a major airplane accident occurs, there is a hitman4683v1 17 22 Aug 2012, 09:51
Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one ggmatt 13 03 Jun 2012, 05:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Whenever a major political scandal erupts before an election

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


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.