LSAT 108 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q3

LR Question 3 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Columnist: Polls can influence voters’ decisions …

QUESTION TYPE: Weaken

CONCLUSION: Publishing polls during the week before an election should be banned.

REASONING:

• Polls can influence voters and distort election outcomes
• They’re less reliable than the public believes
• Polls published immediately before an election can’t easily be disputed
• The ban only minimally impairs free expression

ANALYSIS: This is a cost-benefit analysis. The columnist thinks the costs (the cons) of allowing polls immediately before an election outweigh the benefits (the pros).

So the argument depends on the idea that polls published during the last week before an election actually pose a significant enough problem to justify a ban.

The best way to weaken is to attack the harm that the ban is trying to prevent.

If very few people are influenced by polls published during that period, then banning them doesn’t accomplish much.

The restriction on speech may be minimal, but the benefit of the restriction is also minimal.

___________

1. CORRECT. If almost nobody is influenced by these late polls, then they probably don’t significantly distort elections, and there’s much less justification for banning them.
2. The columnist isn’t talking only about uneven races. The concern is elections generally, especially close ones.
3. This actually strengthens the argument. If polls discourage voting because people think the outcome is certain, that’s another way polls can distort elections.
4. That’s a potential benefit of polls. But it doesn’t directly attack the columnist’s core premise that polls influence voters and distort outcomes. A poll could both highlight late momentum and still distort elections.
5. The columnist’s goal isn’t to make citizens better informed. It’s about preventing distorted election outcomes and reducing the influence of unreliable polls. Even if citizens aren’t better informed, the ban could still serve those goals.