PrepTest 115

Incorrect. This answer suggests that Lorraine's reason for arguing against allowing for referenda isn't a good one, as implementing the shift would result in her premise no longer being true. That weakens her argument.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't speak to whether puting the major outlines to a referendum would be a good or a bad idea, just the scale of how much of a disaster might result, so it doesn't affect Lorraine's argument.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
C: Elections bring up multiple issues, so they don't provide a mandate on any one issue, and so foreign policy decisions should go to referenda.

L: The public won't get informed on those issues, so putting them to referenda would result in bad things.

Answer Anticipation:
This answer reverses the last question—we're now trying to strengthen Lorraine's argument.

As we noted before, the big jump in her argument is assuming that uninformed people deciding foreign policy via referendum would lead to foreign policy disasters. Since there's nothing establishing that as true, we should look for any answer that establishes such a connection exists. In particular, let's try to find an answer that brings up how such a lack of information can lead to a disaster.

Answer Explanation:
This answer provides a reason that a foreign policy referendum would lead to bad things. If allies couldn't make reasonable decisions, then that increases the likelihood that a disaster would occur, strengthening Lorraine's argument.

Key Takeaway:
Two-speaker questions frequently have trap answers that have the desired effect from the question stem on the wrong speaker's argument. Be careful of these, and always know which argument the question stem is addressing!

Incorrect. If anything, this answer provides a means by which Lorraine's objections could be overcome, weakening her argument.

Incorrect. This answer aligns with Claude's argument that elections don't provide mandates on foreign policy because they're imprecise. Since Lorraine's argument is an attempt to rebut Claude's, anything that strengthens his argument can't also strengthen hers.