December 2016 LSAT Section 1 Question 19
Christopher on May 12, 2018@nishkrish the difference comes down to how each answer interacts with the argument. The argument is giving Thompson's opposition to taxes as an example of what makes him a better leader than other candidates, which is what (A) refutes by saying a person's stance on taxes has nothing to do with analyzing leadership skills. The author is not arguing that anyone who opposes taxes must be a good leader, which is what (B) refutes.
on December 15, 2019Hi! I thought that the argument does argue that anyone who opposes taxed must be a good leader - see last sentence. Is this not the case because it is a widespread belied, rather than something the author overtly argues/supports/agrees with? Thank you!
on December 15, 2019Butchered that - ***taxes, ** widespread belief
Shunhe on December 22, 2019@Kristinsmith04, also note that in (B) we see usage of absolute terms (good leader) vs. relative terms (better leader) in the stimulus.