大全的題目

gugu_bird

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.
(E) The founders of a third party are likely to be a coalition consisting of former leaders of the two major parties.

AnswerB)
文章是不是说:第三大党出现，会很不平均的影响原本的两大党派的选票，所以这种方法不应该被允许
这样子怎么可以推论出(b)
假如第三党没出现，选民平均分摊到两党，这两党的得票比率不会超过一半

qww

我认为这道题目出的不很好。但答案只能是B.题目说第三党的 出现仅仅破坏了两个大党中的一个。同时进一步说明第三党仅仅吸引一些支持其中一个大党的选民，而不支持另一大党的选民。Since a third-party candidacy affects the two major candidates unequally因为第三党影响了两个大党的不相等，所以。。。
其实B 是一个前提。B不成立则结论不成立。
我觉得这道题就像为了考逻辑硬凑的一道题，感觉不好。
个人之见！请指教。