16.In a political system with only two major parties, the entrance of a third-party candidate into an election race damages the chances of only one of the two major candidates. The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, but not voters who support the other candidate. Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.
If the factual information in the passage above is true, which of the following can be most reliably inferred from it?
(A) If the political platform of the third party is a compromise position between that of the two major parties, the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties.
(B) If, before the emergence of a third party, voters were divided equally between the two major parties, neither of the major parties is likely to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
(C) A third-party candidate will not capture the votes of new voters who have never voted for candidates of either of the two major parties.
(D) The political stance of a third party will be more radical than that of either of the two major parties.（B）
(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.
A选项我觉得这个the third party will draw its voters equally from the two major parties这句话的EQUALLY 不对，原文只是说会 The third-party candidate always attracts some （一些）of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates,。
接着看BC，我是选C的，因为我看到文中这句话The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates, （but not voters who support the other candidate.）所以就选C了，
原题结论：Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally，thus it should not be allowed. 因此，在不引进the third party的情况下，two major party must be equal. 如果在没有third party的情况下，two major parties 本来就不equal，那引不引进third party都意义不大
注意这句“Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally, for reasons neither of them has any control over, the practice is unfair and should not be allowed.” 中的“for reasons neither of them has any control over” 既然是infer直接推就可以了...
个人理解 关于B项 因为‘The third-party candidate always attracts some of the voters who might otherwise have voted for one of the two major candidates’ 第三方政党的介入使得之前两个政党的"一些"原有选票都流入第三方政党，所以第三方的存在会对前两个政党有不公平的影响，造成‘neither of them has any control over’ 就是说如果第三方政党不存在，原有的两个政党的一些选票都没有流失，双方的的选票数量应该是处于一种势均力敌的状态，没有一家政党'likely' to capture much more than one-half of the vote.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2009-5-11 13:09:00
