Journalist: Although a recent poll found that more than half of all eligible voters support the idea of a political ...

Naz on December 12, 2014

Yes! You have pointed out the flaw exactly! The argument is failing to consider that the 26% and the 16% might not overlap, thereby making 42% which would satisfy the 30% necessary for the party to be viable in the long run.

The argument reasons that this 30% is not met because "only 26 percent would like to join it, and only 16 percent would be prepare to donate money to it." However, if these two groups were separate, or if there was only a slight overlap, then there would be no reason why the 30% would not be met.

This is exactly what answer choice (E) points out: "some of the eligible voters who would donate money to an education party might not be prepared to join such a party." So, some of the 16% prepared to donate money to the education party, may not be part of the 26% that would like to join it, i.e. they are separate groups.

Remember, we are asked to identify the flaw of the argument. That is what answer choice (E) does.

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