GWD2-32 不太明白为什么D不对~~B正确明白，但是D为什么不对不明白

俊秀的皮助

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.

对D取非：就是在president自己区域里取消的计划比那些在对手区域里取消的计划贵，我之所以人为这个选项正确，是因为这可能涉及标准不统一的问题。例如在对手区域超过10快钱就认为人家浪费了，你的区域超过100万才认为浪费，这样标准的不统一就是一直偏袒。所以如果你自己的区域里取消的计划都比较贵，说明你给自己的标准比较高（说明到100万才取消），而对手的标准比较低（超过10快钱就取消），因此证明有不公，削弱结论。这样D就是assumption了

麻烦大家帮忙纠正我对D的思路，我明白为什么B正确，不用给我讲选B的理由了~

xcdamon

与其说这个题 考逻辑 不如说考阅读.
本来多党执政对我们就不怎么熟悉（我家没水表- -）, 要知道 总统和立法时不同的党，总统是last call 的人。
其次 还要知道 首先是认定一个project 是否浪费, 然后总统决定要不要cancel 掉. 如果二十个认定浪费的project要cancel 10个, 如果两个党派各提供十个的  差不多一边各cancel 五个才算fair. 但是B 说 总统cancel了 9个 对面党的, 留下的都是自己人~

xcdamon

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.

刚好做到这道让人抓狂的题  顺便说下我的思路  有不对的地方请指教~
第一句的意思 大概就是 有点像三权分立的国家的意思, 比如总统让共产党当, 立法机构让国名党当. 然后总统有这个权利 去cancel 一个project，就有人批评总统故意针对对立党。
逻辑链是 因为   这个立法机构的projects 90% cancle了, 但是所有cancle的是非党派的审计
               所以   这个总统的选择是根据预算来的 不是党羽斗争

然后是assumption的题目 ---我一般都是直接取非 找削弱观点的---就是总统还是因为党羽斗争，或者说有党派偏见

A. 无关信息 很简单
B. 这里 scheduled （adj. 规定价格的; 预定的, 排定的）这个单词非常重要。相当于认定是浪费 但是没有被cancle 掉的意思。--->所有认定是浪费的project 但是留下来的都是总统党派的方案. 一旦解释道这个地步 很明显的就是削弱了原文的结论---证明这个总统把自己的都留下来了 还是有偏见
C. 无关信息
D. 取非- 被cancle掉的总统的决定通常比对立党的决定要more expensive.---> 首先 expensive 并不等于 wasteful 这是一个很大的逻辑漏洞. 更贵并不代表任何事情，可能总统的project 工程更大。
E. 取非后. 没有削弱原文。相反还适当的加强了原文的结论  --- out