The law of the city of Weston regarding contributions to mayoral campaigns is as follows: all contributions to these...

Lori on May 19, 2017

Difference between C and E???

I got this question correct, but I swear it was by luck. The answers seemed to be saying the exact same thing, so I'm not sure what the distinction is?

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Lori on May 19, 2017

My rationale for Not picking E was that I didn't think what the stimulus said was proof that the campaign didn't register contributions anyway, regardless of what was required.

Is that correct?

Mehran on May 27, 2017

@knoxygirl yes! The difference between (C) and (E) is that (C) says "no contributions . . . needed to be registered with the city council" while (E) says that Brimley's campaign "did not register any contributions with the city council."

So "no contributions . . . needed to be registered" versus "did not register."

We only know that Brimley's campaign was not required to register any contributions with the city council, but it is possible that despite not being required to do so, Brimley's campaign nevertheless still registered some of them.

So (E) is not necessarily true.

Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

William on December 16, 2018

I do not understand why answered a is not correct. All it states is a fact that no non-resident contributed in excess of $100. It could also be and they all still have to be true that no non-resident contribute it all but it is nowhere implied that a contribution in less than 100 was made Norred to my intelligence that it could be true that such a contribution was made.

Ravi on December 16, 2018


Answer (A) is not correct because while it could be true, it doesn't have to be true. A states that no nonresident of Weston contributed in excess of $100 to Brimley's campaign. This doesn't have to be true, as there could be a nonresident WHO DID contribute in excess of $100, as this person could be a nonresident who is a former resident.

If this person were a former resident, then this scenario still fits with Brimley's campaign accepting contributions only from residents and former residents.

The key distinction here is that a nonresident could also be a former resident.

Billy on May 15, 2020

Can you please explain how we know that Brimley's campaign was not required to register any contributions with the city council? For some reason, I'm not following. Feels like I missed something very critical...