Question

It cannot be true that the lack of success of third-party candidates in national elections is due to the difficulties such candidates encounter in securing space on national ballots. Everyone who identifies him or herself as a supporter of a third party has voted for a major-party candidate in at least one national election when a third-party candidate was listed on the ballot.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a reasoning flaw in the argument?

Options

• The argument overlooks the possibility that the lack of success of third-party candidates in national elections may be due to the fact that their views on major issues prevent them from gaining broad support

• The argument takes for granted that the media coverage devoted to third-party candidates for national office is comparable to that devoted to major party candidates for those same offices

• The argument treats as contradictory to some claim evidence that may instead provide support for that claim

• The argument draws its conclusion through the use of a set of facts, not all of which can be true

Answer 1

The argument treats as contradictory to some claim evidence that may instead provide support for that claim

Explanation:

The claim is that third party candidates fall to succeed in the elections because they encounter difficulties in securing space on national ballots  ‘Securing space on national ballots’ means proper recognition as a party on the national level. The evidence provided in the argument ends up supporting the claim. Though 'The argument draws its conclusion through the use of a set of facts, not all of which can be true' is correct.