PrepTest 115, Section 4, Question 25
Political commentator: Voters tend to elect the candidate(33 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- AElections are unfair(16 more words not shown)
- BPeople have positive(13 more words not shown)
- CThe tendency of(18 more words not shown)
- DCandidates invariably buy(12 more words not shown)
- EAny candidate whose(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does seeing a candidate more often make people feel better about that candidate?
The premise concerns the response to a visual image. The conclusion concerns how much media exposure candidates can buy. More exposure could help an image win people over, but it might also give viewers more chances to dislike what they see. We haven't yet connected buying more exposure with the positive feelings that affect voting.
Also, a positive response to someone's image needn't be only about physical attractiveness. Keep the claim as stated: the image evokes favorable feelings, and voters tend to elect the candidate whose image does that most.
What we’re looking for
For the necessary assumption, I'd predict a connection from increased media exposure to increased positive feelings. If additional exposure never helped an image evoke those feelings, the stated voter tendency wouldn't explain this particular restriction on spending. We need that connection, not a complete account of everything that makes an election fair.
Working the answers
- A
This makes unequal resources a requirement for an unfair election. The argument doesn't need to rule out every other source of unfairness. It proposes improving fairness by addressing one possible advantage. An election could be unfair for another reason while the proposed restriction still addressed the concern in this argument.
- B
Familiarity could be one way exposure produces favorable feelings, but B makes familiarity required for any positive response. Why couldn't a new image create a favorable first impression? The argument only needs additional exposure to help at least sometimes, not a rule that unfamiliar candidates can never evoke positive feelings. B is stronger than the needed connection.
- CCorrect
Increased exposure at least sometimes increases the positive feelings evoked by a candidate's image. That connects the spending restriction to the voter tendency in the premise.
Now we have a reason to worry that one candidate's ability to buy much more exposure could create the kind of advantage that matters to voters. The argument doesn't need every additional appearance to help every candidate. C makes the modest connection required for this explanation of the proposed restriction.
- D
Candidates needn't always spend the maximum allowed for unequal buying power to be a concern. Some candidates might leave money unspent while others take advantage of their greater resources. The recommendation doesn't require a universal claim that every candidate invariably buys all the exposure available.
- E
A tendency isn't a guarantee. The premise says voters tend to elect the candidate whose image evokes the most positive feelings. E rules out anyone whose image evokes few positive feelings. A candidate could inspire little enthusiasm yet still compare favorably with an even less appealing opponent. The author doesn't need E's absolute prediction.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.