Logical Reasoning

PT112 · S4 · Q5 In a poll of eligible voters conducted

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

In a poll of eligible voters conducted on the eve of a mayoral election, more of those polled stated that they favored Panitch than stated that they favored any other candidate.

Given that ...

On a poll of eligible voters, taken the night before the election, Panitch got the most #1 votes on favorability.

How can it be that ...

Yeung beat Panitch by a comfortable margin?

Evaluate

We basically need to explain why the survey suggested P would be the winner while reality made Y the winner. Usually, on EXCEPT questions, 3 of the 4 answers we're eliminating come at the stimulus from one angle, while the 4th wrong answer takes a different tactic.

In this case, there are a couple ways we could explain the disconnect between the survey and reality.

1. The survey was crappy data in that the responses weren't accurate.

2. The survey was crappy data in that the respondents weren't a representative sample of people who would be voting in the election.

2. The survey was good data at the time, but something suddenly changed between when the poll was taken and when the election was held.

Goal

Eliminate four answers that can explain the mismatch between a survey won by Panitch and an election won by Yeung.

The correct answer might deepen the paradox, or more likely it will just be neutral.

Each of the following, if true, contributes to a resolution of the discrepancy described above EXCEPT:

Correct
Of Yeung’s supporters, a smaller
Why this is right
Our job here, "Given that Panitch was leading in the poll, how did Yeung win the election?" This answer says, "Yeung won because a smaller percentage of his supporters were eligible to vote." That's counterintuitive. Having a smaller group of your supporters be eligible to vote would help you lose, not win.
Skill tested: Paradox · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
71% picked this
A third candidate, Mulhern, conducted
Helps Explain
Our job here, "Given that Panitch was leading in the poll, how did Yeung win the election?" This answer says, "Yeung won because a third candidate dropped out, and (so all their voters switched to Yeung)." For example, say in the 2020 election, it was Trump vs. Biden vs. Andrew Yang They do a poll and ask people the night before the election, "who's your favorite candidate". The results: 40% - Trump 35% - Biden 15% - Yang 10% - others, combined That makes it seem like Trump will win. But if Yang realizes he has no chance and drops out the morning of the election (publicly, via press conference), then Yang voters will have to decide whether to vote for Biden or Trump, and that could make a previous underdog like Biden still win the election by a large margin. Naturally, this answer doesn't tell us that Mulhern voters defected to Yeung once they learned their candidate was no longer running, but it creates the opportunity to tell that story, which still can help explain the discrepancy.
12% picked this
The poll’s questions were designed
Helps Explain
Our job here, "Given that Panitch was leading in the poll, how did Yeung win the election?" This answer says, "Yeung lost the poll because it was rigged by Panitch's campaign. Yeung was, in reality, more popular among the electorate. But since the poll was designed by members of Panitch's campaign, they structured it so that people would be more inclined to say favorable things about their preferred candidate". That's why survey didn't match election: survey was biased towards Panitch. Again, this answer only provides the suggestive foundations for such a story, but that's still better than what the correct answer is does (provide foundations for the opposite story).
4% picked this
Of the poll respondents supporting
Helps Explain
Our job here, "Given that Panitch was leading in the poll, how did Yeung win the election?" This answer says, "Yeung won the election because her voters actually showed up to the polls. Panitch's voters just responded to the poll but they flaked on election day because only 30% of them considered the election important." Survey didn't match election because survey didn't account for likelihood of whether that person would actually vote.
4% picked this
The poll, conducted on a
Helps Explain
Our job here, "Given that Panitch was leading in the poll, how did Yeung win the election?" This answer says, "Yeung lost the poll because it was taken in a potentially unrepresentative area of town, which bends towards Panitch supporters. If they had polled out in the suburbs and rural areas, they probably would have encountered a lot more Yeung voters." Survey didn't match election because survey's sample was unrepresentative of the overall city.
8% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free