PrepTest 110, Section 3, Question 14
People's political behavior frequently does not match their(42 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(20 more words not shown)
- AIt describes a(11 more words not shown)
- BIt is a(16 more words not shown)
- CIt is offered(21 more words not shown)
- DIt is a(14 more words not shown)
- EIt is cited(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does voting for someone mean you like everything that person does?
The passage initially makes me think about hypocrisy: people complain about government interference, then support politicians whose activity affects their lives. But what if voters don't like either candidate? Choosing the better of two unwanted options doesn't mean a voter is pleased with the choice.
Read the actual conclusion carefully, though. The author doesn't conclude that voters are hypocrites. The claim is that they often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent. Limited choices could help explain why they do that without showing the description is false. If I dislike a candidate's behavior and vote for that candidate anyway, I've done exactly what this conclusion describes.
Now we're asked about the statement that people tend not to reelect inactive politicians. That's part of the support. It helps establish that voters favor active politicians, while the next statement connects political activity with laws that affect voters' lives. Those points help support the conclusion about reelecting politicians whose behavior voters resent.
What we’re looking for
We need an answer that identifies this supporting role and describes the conclusion accurately. Calling something a premise is only half the job; the rest of the answer must match what that premise supports.
Working the answers
- A
This reverses the relationship. The author doesn't use the conclusion to explain why voters avoid reelecting inactive politicians. The voting pattern is offered as a reason to accept the conclusion about whom voters reelect. It is supporting evidence, not the event the conclusion explains.
- BCorrect
The statement is a premise supporting the claim that voters often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent. It supplies the voting-pattern part of that argument: inactive politicians tend not to be reelected. Combined with the description of what active politicians do, it helps the author connect voters' choices with the government activity they complain about.
- C
The statement describes voters' behavior, not an example of politicians passing laws. How voters respond to inactive politicians is a separate piece of evidence from what political activity consists of. C confuses those two roles.
- D
The author doesn't derive this voting pattern from the fact that people complain about government intervention. Both are presented as observations to use in the argument. Complaining about intervention wouldn't, by itself, establish whether people reelect inactive politicians.
- E
Never is much stronger than frequently. The author can describe many cases in which behavior and rhetoric don't match while allowing other cases in which they do. The targeted statement isn't being used to establish that people's actions never match their political beliefs.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.