Astorga’s campaign promises are

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: capable5% picked this

   If she is elected mayor, Astorga will not be capable of carrying out the campaign

   The argument is about Intent, not results / capacity / feasibility. The author doesn't have to assume that Astorga is incapable of following through on her campaign promises. He might believe that she's perfectly capable of following through on the promises, but just doesn't plan to because she's not willing to pursue those ends.

   5%
2. B

   Out of Scope: inaccurate poll5% picked this

   The opinion polls on which Astorga’s promises are based do not accurately reflect what voters want the

   The author didn't indicate any skepticism of the opinion polls. He may well believe that the opinion polls correctly reflect the voters' actual wishlist, but still believe that Astorga has no plans to actually follow through on these campaign promises (she's just telling voters what they want to hear in order to get elected).

   5%
3. C

   Out of Scope1% picked this

   Most voters are unlikely to be persuaded by Astorga’s campaign promises to vote for her

   Out of Scope: whether people vote for her Too Strong: most The argument is only about whether Astorga's intent matches her current rhetoric. The argument isn't affected one way or the other by whether Astorga wins or loses the election, so the author doesn't need to assume anything about what votes she'll receive or not receive. Furthermore, the word/concept of "most" will be wrong on Necessary Assumption 99.5% of the time we see it. When you negate "most" you're basically saying, "Nuh-uh, author. It's not true that at least 51% of voters are unlikely to be persuaded. It's at most 49%." No argument is every badly weakened by switching from "at least 51%" to "at most 49%", so negating "most" will basically never weaken.

   1%
4. D

   Too Strong: no strong opinions8% picked this

   Astorga has no strong opinions of her own about what the new mayor ought to

   The author doesn't need to assume that Astorga sought out opinion polls because she has no strong opinions of her own. She may well have strong opinions but still seek opinion polls to see how well they align with the strong opinions of voters. Furthermore, she may have strong opinions of what she thinks the new mayor ought to do, while still hiding those opinions and just telling the voters what they want to hear. So negating this, and saying "she does have at least one strong opinion" wouldn't weaken the argument at all.

   8%
5. E

   Correct81% picked this

   Astorga does not actually intend, if elected, to do what she has learned from the public opinion polls that voters want

   Why this is right

   This just establishes the difference that the author was assuming. Astorga is telling voters that she'll do the things she knows they want the mayor to do. The author believes that voters aren't hearing what she'll really do. So the author is assuming that she won't really do the things she knows they want the mayor to do. If we negated this answer, we'd get, "Astorga actually does intend, if elected, to do [the things she's currently telling voters that she intends to do]", which would badly weaken the argument by essentially contradicting the conclusion.

   Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   81%