It took me a while to fully make sense of how to diagram E, but here's what ended up clarifying things for me!

E asserts the following:

Well-functioning democracy (WFD) & Most people favor & No BHR violations -> Bill passed promptly

If we took the contrapositive of E and apply DeMorgan's Laws:

/Bill passed promptly -> BHR violations or Mostly unfavored or /WFD

Comparing these statements with our first premise...

Most people favor & No BHR violations & /WFD -> /Bill passed promptly

Since the bill is favored by most people and has no basic human right violations, yet it still fails, then the country must not have a WFD. Because we have conjunctions in the sufficient condition, all three factors must together guarantee our necessary condition, as two alone are not sufficient to trigger it.

Additionally, since DeMorgan's laws changed our conjunctions to "or", now we only need one condition to trigger when the sufficient condition triggers; in this case,

/Bill passed promptly -> /WFD

@Daedalus All my passages thus far have fallen in the 1-4 difficulty range, primarily toward the lower end. Not sure how the algorithm goes about assigning these... (which is frustrating, as I want some more experience with harder passages).

@BradyBrook For the drills thus far, I've been writing out brief summaries of each paragraph, which have placed me roughly 45 seconds over the recommended time (so not ideal). But this has allowed me to move through the questions much more quickly - and accurately - as my comprehension of the text feels more solid. So, I at least recommend writing while you're practicing the RC section!

I'm hoping that, come time for my LSAT date, I feel comfortable not writing anything out at all, only highlighting the text.

My logic doesn't exactly follow with the analysis provided, but perhaps it still works... for my initial attempt, I set up my conditionals as follows:

Large Nurseries -m-> Commercial Raspberry Growers

Sell Plants -> Disease-Free (I put this under the domain of "Large Nurseries")

Johnson received raspberry plants with a virus, breaking the second conditional claim (or following the contrapositive:

/Disease-Free -> /Plants sold by Large Nurseries)

Although I kicked the second conditional into the domain of "Large Nurseries", I forgot to apply the "Most" quantifier to this statement, working through all of the answers under the assumption that no large nursery could sell diseased plants (as that would break our conditional).

But looking at E with this in mind, Wally's plants could still be a large nursery, but instead falls outside the bounds of our quantifier, and therefore doesn't have to "sell only plants guaranteed to be disease-free". This may be making an unwarranted assumption, but it's how I justified the answer before reading the tutor analysis.