Tuesday's questions and sample explanations - #4

4. Experts on the American political process have long agreed that voters like it when presidential candidates are combative (eager to fight), even aggressive, against each other. A poll just after the 1988 election, however, showed that many people had been annoyed or disgusted with the campaign and had not even bothered to vote. In addition, many voters felt that most candidates were “non-presidential.” Campaigns that are combative have therefore become counter-productive, causing voters to lose respect for the combative candidate.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

1. Many presidential campaigns have been memorable, because they were full of surprises.
2. The poll cited does not specifically show that combative campaigning was responsible for voter disaffection.
3. Even before 1988, many voters were skeptical about politicians, particularly candidates for President.
4. What looks like aggressiveness is really assertiveness, which is necessary for the candidate to keep his name in the public eye.
5. Political campaigning is a way to give voters important information, which they need in order to decide who to vote for.

(B) is correct. This is a weaken question, meaning the correct answer will, if true, make the conclusion less likely. The argument is that voters don't like nasty, negative campaigning and when candidates act that way, voters get turned off and stay home. The argument cites a poll which shows two things: (1) people were annoyed or disgusted with the campaign, and (2) many had not bothered to vote. However, if the poll does not specifically show that (1) was the cause of (2), that conclusion becomes less likely.

(A) is incorrect because it does not affect the validity of the argument. The fact that campaigns are "memorable" and/or "full of surprises" has no effect one way or the other on voter behavior caused by negative campaigning.

(C) is incorrect because whether the same phenomenon occurred prior to 1988, when the poll was taken, makes no difference. If it was true then, that does not by itself mean that it's any less true now.

(D) is incorrect because it attempts to explain or justify the behavior of politicians, which is irrelevant to the argument. Why they run nasty or negative campaigns, or whether it's justified, is irrelevant to the issue of what effect such campaigns have on voters.

(E) is incorrect because it is a highly generalized statement about political campaigning, and completely ignores the issue at hand. At issue is how candidates communicate ideas to voters, not whether they can, or should.