Question stem: Most Strongly Support, the correct answer will be supported by the statements given by the city leader

Stimulus: If our city adopts the new plan, tourists will spend an increase of $2 billion which creates as many jobs as the automobile manufacturing plan. It would be reasonable to spend the amount of money necessary to convince the manufacturer to built a plant, but adopting the tourism plan would cost less.

(A) We cannot say that the tourism plan is the less expensive job available, something could be even less expensive, eliminate.

(B) This one was hard for me but I think the distinction comes between “it is reasonable” vs. “it would be reasonable.” It is reasonable means the city should do it vs. it would be reasonable if there wasn’t this other plan that is going to cost less.

(C) You don’t know if the city can afford to spend money on both an automobile manufacturer or a new tourism plan just that one is reasonable and one is more reasonable because it costs less.

(D) CORRECT – it is reasonable for the city to adopt a new plan.

(E) “the only”? eliminate, you don’t know if there are other ways, there definitely could be.

Question stem: MBT, the correct answer will use the statements provided in the stimulus to make a statement that must be true

Stimulus: There are some politicians who strongly supported free trade among these three countries (Canada, the U.S., and Mexico) and they are now refusing to support publicly the idea that free trade should be extended to other countries in Latin America.

(A) We can’t say anything about some of the politicians who do support extending free trade to other Latin American countries

(B) Same reasoning as (A)

(C) We don’t know if they changed their positions, maybe they have always refused to support but just are not doing so publicly.

(D) CORRECT – It must be true that not all politicians who strongly support free trade among the three countries support extending free trade to other Latin American countries because there are at least some who refuse to support the idea of free trade extending to other Latin American countries.

(E) This one is hard to see what’s wrong but I guess the idea is “now publicly oppose.” The stimulus is just saying that the refuse to support publicly maybe they don’t actually oppose but they also don’t want to support publicly. This is a subtle distinction.

Question Stem: resolve, reconcile, consider , the correct answer choice will help explain the apparent discrepancy between the set of information

Stimulus: The hardware store usually sells the same number of M hammer and S hammers. But last week M hammers were put on sale in the display case right inside the store entrance and the S hammers remained where they normally are. Surprisingly the S hammers slightly outsold the M hammers (even though we might think that M hammers would outsell S hammers because they are on sale)

(A) CORRECT – if when shoppers enter the store they don’t really take a detailed notice of the merchandise they’re probably more likely to walk on in and not even notice the S hammers and then direct themselves to the hammer isle and buy the M hammers especially since they usually sell for in equal numbers when they in the same aisle

(B) I thought this was right because I thought we could conclude that the consumers would look at the sale price of M hammers and think that the quality must therefore not be as good as M hammers which are regular price. I guess one of the things that is wrong about the sentence is “quality and service.” How would customers know anything about the different types of service that the two hammers offer? This would require too many outside assumptions.

(C) If this were true, you would think to see more people buying M hammers again this time because they are on sale.

(D) Also furthers the discrepancy because if you saw a bunch of advertisements for sales of M hammers you might expect to see more sales of M hammers than S.

(E) Irrelevant, they are in the store already, we are talking about what got one to sell more than another.

Question Stem : weakens, the correct answer choice will weaken the argument

Stimulus: There are two lakes Q and H in the Pawpaw mountains both declining in fish. Since then, fishing was banned on Q lake and the fish population recovered. At H lake the fish population continued to decline. Conclusion: the ban on fishing is what is probably responsible for the increased fish population at Q lake.

(A) At first I thought this was correct because I thought that if H was more susceptible to acid rain then it might have an impact on the fish population and therefore we can’t conclusively draw the finding that the ban is what caused the fish to Q and this explain why H continues to see a decrease in the fish population; HOWEVER, I don’t think this tackles the main point of the question which is to weaken the claim that the ban is responsible for the rebound of the fish in Q lake as the focus here is too much on H lake.

(B) Correct, if there was practically no fishing at Q lake before the ban was even instated, then the ban probably didn’t do much to help make the fish return and it was instead something else.

(C) Doesn’t matter if H is larger than Q

(D) Out of scope

(E) We don’t care about the species

I'm in the same boat! I decided to sign up for January to give myself some peace of mind and know that there is another option for me even though it is a little later in terms of applying than I hoped. If it helps I think you should take the November as if that's the score you are going to apply with (also feel out how you think you did after the test and kind of predict your score) then spend some time after the LSAT working on your personal statement/applications and everything. By then you will know if you need to take the test again in January but at least you will have started working towards completing admissions applications. That way, if you do end up needing to take the January lsat you will have all the materials ready to go and submit.

Question stem: Point-at-issue – disagreement the correct answer will state what the two speakers disagree on

Stimulus: Richard: abstract art doesn’t meet fundamental requirement of art (which is that it represent) and thus it will be seen as an aberration.

Jung-Su: It does reject literal representation; however, abstract artists represent formal features. Thus, abstract art is part of the mainstream.

(A) They would both agree that abstract art rejects literal representation

(B) Only Richard talks about a fundamental requirement

(C) Only Jung-Su talks about musicians

(D) I initially thought this was correct because Richard said abstract art would become an aberration and Jung-Su said abstract art is part of the mainstream thinking that this meant Jung-Su would disagree that the work would ever be seen as an aberration. However this is talking about the work in the future, that art WILL be seen as an aberration and Jung-Su makes no such predictions. This was my fault for making an assumption.

(E) CORRECT – More literally stated in the passage than answer choice D. Richard says that abstract art is not representational, it misses this fundamental requirement. Jung-Su disagrees and says that it does represent but only the purely formal features of objects that are discovered when perspectives are rejected.