Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party. C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future. D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties. E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects. 答案是B 请赐教感激不尽
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.
答案是B
请赐教感激不尽
B说非政府审计员的那个report中的项目并不是President’s party控制的所有项目，从而证明和press secretary所证明的的是正确的。两者的调查的项目的范围不同。
是这样吗？同样请教～谢谢～
这题我想了半天，觉得是这样的（也不一定准确还请更明白的人指点）
前提：President被批评是因为90%被取消的project都是在反对党那一区
结论（Press Secretary所反对）：president 作出上述的决定是因为与反对党过不去
Secretary 反对这种说法的原因是--> all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors , 这里面我觉得最重要的是wasteful,因为相应的结论是President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy ，not partisan politics.
于是假设的内容一定要证明president所作的决定是出于反对浪费而与政党无关，也就是说如果president所管辖区内出现了wasteful的project, 就不能得出后面的结论
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. 显然是在weaken
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
那些已经在建的wasteful项目并没有在总统政党控制区，如果那些超过预算的项目在执政党所在区的话，那么可以说是总统如何如何，反之亦然。所以想想这个答案也算合理
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future. 会有很多项目取消与全文的论点无关，因为全文废了那么多话的中心是要说明取消项目与党派歧视是否有关
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties. 总统党派cancel了project不能证明他cancel反对党的不是有意为难人家，无法推出结论
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects. 无关
B. The
scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were
not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
在（第三方）报告中被认为是铺张浪费的高速公路计划项目多数都不是在总统政党控制区中的项目。
怎么都觉得这句话应该可以是总统的反对党拿来攻击总统决定的条件。
因为原先总是在想反对党可以这样说：你说的这个第三方怎么把我们的项目都说成了浪费项目，显然是倾向于你们的，不公正。
但是反复想过之后，终于想明白题干中的陈述应该是作为不可置疑的事实存在的，所以既然题干中all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors.所有的报告是第三方作出的（表示公正），B选项中再说明这个报告中指出属于浪费的项目多数不是总统党的——当然就是反对党的，那么总统根据以上取消的项目多数都是反对党的也就是合理的。
B应该是对的。
看来我自己的逻辑思路有问题啊
up6楼的解释。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |