Thanks for your question, @yaehz. As always, let's start with a careful evaluation of the stimulus.
The stimulus presents an argument. The conclusion is "voters often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent." The supporting premises are: (1) many people complain about government intervention in their lives, but (2) people tend not to reelect inactive politicians, and (3) a politician's activity consists largely in the passage of laws, the enforcement of which affects voters' lives.
This is an Argument Structure logical reasoning question. The question stem asks us to identify the role played by a specific claim--"that people tend not to reelect inactive politicians." As evident Sent from my iPad analysis above, this is a premise offered in support of the ultimate conclusion. Thus, answer choice (B) is correct.
Answer choice (E) misrepresents the argument in the stimulus, and so cannot correctly identify the role played by the specific claim the question stem has asked us about. This specific claim is not evidence that people's behavior "NEVER" matches their political beliefs. That claim is not supported by ANY of the premises, and is much stronger than the actual conclusion in the stimulus (which is just that people's behavior frequently does not match their beliefs).
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
pajbermanAugust 28, 2019
What part does the first sentence play in this? "People's political behavior..." Is it a subsidiary conclusion?
RaviAugust 28, 2019
@pajberman,
The first sentence of the stimulus is simply background information/context. It's just giving us context from which to read the rest of the stimulus.
Does that make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!
