GWD2-Q32: Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics. Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary's argument depends? A.Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. B.The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party. C.The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future. D.The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President's party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties. E.Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects. A:(B) 我是选(E)，一开始会马上把(B)删掉，它只是说大部分被删除的区域非执政党管辖 感觉跟最後的"not partisan politics"没有多大关连。 我选(E)是因为the press secretary引用此report所以为了强化此report的正确性 说明反对党并无把这份report当作评论来源，所以会认为执政党是在处罚他们，如 果他们去看了这份report，或许会意识到:"it is wastful not political"。 还是(E)可以当推论，并不适合当假设? (像这种assumption常会无头绪@@") 谢谢善心人士回答^^ --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 122.118.164.168