PrepTest 133, Section 3, Question 26
A recent poll showed that almost half of(43 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(11 more words not shown)
- AAlmost all of(28 more words not shown)
- BIn the time(31 more words not shown)
- CAbout a fifth(14 more words not shown)
- DWalker is currently(15 more words not shown)
- EWalker has defended(21 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Could someone think Walker behaved badly and still think he does a good job as mayor? Sure. Perhaps the alleged ethics problem concerns private conduct that doesn't change that person's view of how well the city is being run. That's one possible explanation to consider, not something we've been told about these allegations.
But wait: are we even talking about the same people?
Almost half believe Walker is guilty, while 52 percent rate his performance good or excellent. Those could largely be different groups. Imagine a city of 100 residents: 48 think poorly of the mayor, and the other 52 approve. If the accusations convince the 48 critics that he is guilty, the approval figure needn't fall. Those people weren't approving of him beforehand.
What we’re looking for
That gets us closer to the precise puzzle. We aren't just explaining how anyone could approve of a mayor accused of misconduct. We're explaining why his favorable rating hasn't fallen despite widespread belief in his guilt. An answer showing that the people convinced of guilt were already critics would give us a strong reason the scandal hasn't cost him favorable ratings.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Almost all the residents who believe Walker is guilty already rated his performance poor before the accusations. Learning about the alleged violations therefore gives those people another reason to criticize someone they already criticized. It needn't move them out of the favorable-rating group, because they weren't in that group to begin with.
That makes the unchanged approval figure much less surprising. The answer doesn't establish absolutely no overlap between the groups, or prove that today's 52 percent are exactly the same individuals as before. It doesn't need to. By locating almost all the belief in guilt among prior critics, it explains why widespread belief in guilt can coexist with a stable favorable rating.
- B
Walker's opponents gaining favorable ratings doesn't show why Walker's own rating stayed the same. Residents could think well of more than one politician, or different groups could be improving their opinions of the opponents. We still need the connection between belief in Walker's guilt and his unchanged job approval.
- C
The uninformed fifth might keep their old views because they haven't heard the accusations. That could help explain stability for some residents. But it doesn't account for why the overall favorable rating remains unchanged when almost half believe Walker is guilty. A addresses the relationship between those believers and prior approval much more directly.
- D
An election and an endorsement of Walker's opponent don't explain residents continuing to rate Walker favorably. The anticorruption groups' choice could reflect their opposition to him, but knowing where those groups stand doesn't tell us why the city's overall assessment of his performance hasn't declined.
- E
This resembles the initial thought that people might separate the alleged misconduct from the mayor's work. But Walker offering a defense isn't the same as residents accepting it. They might reject his claim about staff mistakes entirely. To use the defense to explain stable approval, we'd need evidence that it affected residents' judgments. A gives us an actual fact about the people who believe he's guilty and how they already viewed his performance.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.