MGMAT 5 -verbal CR

[krutiks511]

Political Analyst: Because our city is a border city, illegal immigration is an important issue in the current race for mayor. Of the two candidates for mayor, one supports a plan that would attempt to deport the city’s 9,000 illegal immigrants and the other does not. Surveys consistently show that about 60% of the city’s residents are opposed to the plan, while about 35% are in support of the plan. Therefore, the candidate who does not support the plan will win the election for mayor.

All of the following statements weaken the analyst’s argument, EXCEPT:

(A) In the city at issue, most voters make their voting decisions based on the candidates’ positions on abortion.

(B) Of the 35% of residents who support the plan, some are willing to consider alternate plans for addressing illegal immigration.

(C) Many of the residents who oppose the plan are not registered voters.

(D) The candidate who supports the plan is the incumbent mayor, and has been elected to four consecutive terms despite taking controversial positions on many important issues.

(E) Just under 30% of the city’s residents are illegal immigrants who cannot vote.

I am confused between A and B.On the exam I chose B ,but now when I look back I find A equally appealing.I don't understand how does A weaken the argument in any way?

[Chelsey Cooley]

Think about the conclusion and how it relates to the structure of the argument. The conclusion is that Candidate A, who opposes deporting immigrants, will win. Why will he or she win, according to the argument? Presumably because the voters who oppose the plan (the majority) will all vote for Candidate A. But that's a big assumption to make: just because those voters agree with Candidate A on immigration, how do we know they'll actually vote for A? We don't.

Your next step: answer choice (A) addresses this exact assumption, and therefore, weakens the argument. Can you articulate how it does that?