June 2007 PrepTest, Section 2, Question 19
By Brandon Beaver | Published October 29, 2024
Type: Strengthen
Difficulty:
Explanations
This is the flaw of cherry picking (using only data/circumstances that support your idea, while completely ignoring the others that might not). The historian mentions a set of circumstances that seem compelling, but what else was going on? A weakener will propose other circumstances or facts that might provide alternative explanations for the Land Party’s victory. Thus, strengtheners will do the opposite: foreclose those alternative explanations.
A
Bingo. Urban groups? They didn’t target them in this election either, so this doesn’t suggest any change in strategy. How would that strengthen? This is the answer because it’s a complete dud.
B
This strengtheners by explaining why those tactics might have worked.
C
This strengthens because it provides a correlation to support the cause and effect (not great evidence, but definitely some evidence).
D
This strengthens by foreclosing the objection that “every other party did that too, so why would the Land Party have won this time by doing the same thing as everyone else?”
E
This strengthens by explaining that, maybe, in preceding elections, not enough people the Land Party attempted to support actually went out to vote.
Passage
Historian: The Land Party achieved its only national victor
Question 19
Each of the following, if true, strengthens the historian's