Citizen of Mooresville: Mooresville’s current city council is having a ruinous effect on municipal finances. Since a majority of the incumbents are running for reelection, I am going to campaign against all these incumbents in the upcoming city council election. The only incumbent I will support and vote for is the one who represents my own neighborhood, because she has the experience necessary to ensure that our neighborhoods interests are served. If everyone in Mooresville would follow my example, we could substantially change the council’s membership.
Assuming that each citizen of Mooresville is allowed to vote only for a city council representative from his or her own neighborhood, for the council’s membership to be changed substantially, it must be true that
(A) at least some other voters in Mooresville do not make the same exception for their own incumbent in the upcoming election (B) most of the eligible voters in Mooresville vote in the upcoming election (C) few of the incumbents on the Mooresville city council have run for reelection in previous elections (D) all of the seats on the Mooresville city council are filled by incumbents whose terms are expiring (E) none of the challengers in the upcoming election for seats on Mooresville’s city council are better able to serve the interests of their neighborhoods than were the incumbents作者: s_dUSA 时间: 2012-7-17 04:15
it's a necessary assumption question, and when you see item A, you should be cautious, because more often then not, when it comes to necessary aasumption, it has "at least some" in it, but rarely has "all or none or most" , because it probably changes it into a sufficient assimption.
And on the other hand, A is correct because if everyone did what the speak did, none of the incumbent will be taken down because they all got supported by the voters in their own community.作者: yiner0111 时间: 2012-7-17 11:03
lz说的我紧张了。。。才开始看bible，就要倒数了，泪奔，早上不睡懒觉了。。。。作者: 玛莎丁丁 时间: 2012-7-17 19:43
The problem is we are not told how the incumbents were elected before. Even if all of them got support from their own region doesn't necessarily ensure re-election. Ambiguously I feel A suggests that the effect of the suggestion will be negated if everyone does exactly what was proposed. but still cannot output a neat logic track...
Can you put it in a more clear way? Thanks作者: s_dUSA 时间: 2012-7-18 01:06
I understand this is a pretty trick question, and I think it is very cultural, because most Chinese students (including me) didn't know the process of US election. I guess you can only vote for one candidate in each election, and the author said that I will vote for one incumbent who represents my neighborhood, actually it means the author only will vote for one person-the incumbent from his neighborhood. And if everyone follows him, all the incumbents will be back. I also believe you probably cannot vote against some candidates, just like the presidential election, you may not vote for Obama, but you cannot vote against him.
That is what I thought, I hope others can give some advice作者: s_dUSA 时间: 2012-7-18 01:10
For this question, I think the best way to solve it is following the step of ellimination in the real exam, because A has "at least some", which is a good indicator of right answer, others have "most", "all", "none" and "few", which are indicative of bad answers for necessary assumption questions
I hope others can give some adivce, this is a very trick question作者: 玛莎丁丁 时间: 2012-7-18 23:02
Yep, anyway, I guess the small words you mentioned do help. thanks
