just got crushed by this flaw Q, pt22 , s2, q 25 Forum

[flash21]

Initially, I noticed quickly its comparing two different groups, and also that it is saying MORE people vote for group "X" when we only know about percentages. I go into the answer choices looking for those and end up debating between (A) and (D), and it ends up being (B)!

I wrote off (B) because I didn't see any suff/nec condition, or at least not in the way I'm used to this being an issue.

I read the manhattan forums I still don't get it at all. Confusing suff with necessary?! Ugh.

Thanks in advance.

[Causidicus]

In order to be convicted it is necessary that one be indicted first; therefore, the 50% of the people who believe that elected officials should resign when indicted would also be counted in the group who believe they should resign when convicted. So really 85% believe that elected officials should resign when convicted and only 50% when indicted. Therefore the conclusion is obviously flawed since the author is confusing the sufficient and necessary conditions when concluding more believe indicted then convicted.

[P.J.Fry]

50% believe they should resign IF indicted
35% believe they should resign ONLY IF convicted

[flash21]

thanks guys, I get the suff/nec condition mistake now in the stimulus.

I guess this answer choices are just kind of tough. I didn't recognize the suff/nec issue initially so that screwed me up pretty bad, and even knowing there is this issue it just doesn't look like the typical suff/nec issue (IE: look at pt 24, s2, q23 - this is the type of suff / nec that I would recognize right away and find in the answer choices). This one was different for some reason/