GWD--14--2关于怎么削弱的推导！求解！

luciole

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.


答案是第二个选项，即B，但为什么不是E呢，如果反对党认为那个分析报告不够客观不就可以削弱么，第二个的意思我理解的是那些在报告中认为是浪费的但是又被保留下来的高速路工程不是大多在总统所在党区里，那么就是说保留下来的浪费型的在反对党那里，这不就成了总统反而偏袒反对党么？？
求NN们指点啊！！


顺便问一下，为什么讨论索引帖子里面GWD的CR讨论只有1-13套呢？外加一个24套，中间的都没有，或者很少，不全，不是说14套之后的比较新么？更值得做一些。。。

luciole

这个削弱实在是看半天都觉得应该是有问题的啊，虽然说E项并非是理想的答案，但是按照选最优，也只有这一个削弱了，B项看不出怎么个削弱法的。。。

gracezz

B里说那报告里面被报告出来的区里，总统管的不占多数。
如果总统管的占多数。但是总统最后引用的还是那占少数的opposite的地区的话，就说明总统选的时候确实是有倾向的。