Can someone explain to me why "politicians being corrupt" is the sufficient condition for the Qarth question? Following the group one rule, it follows "when" and should be the sufficient condition and "decline" should be the necessary condition. I feel like I am overlooking something very simple here.

Okay, I got the question right but I dont believe that I really understand what the question is asking....can someone please explain this to me like I am five years old please? I think the part that is most tripping me up is the "..over the truth.." part

I still am confused about when there is a predicate object and when there is not, if someone can please explain that would be much appreciated!

Can someone please explain #6 to me? I am so lost.

For 3, is it wrong to write "Eat Burger←s→/Drink Beer"?

Can someone explain 12 to me please?

For 2, can we not understand "several" as "few" meaning that the Lawgic would look like this:

city←s→hpso and city ‑m→/hpso

Is it wrong to think of the quantifiers in this order from least to greatest?

some→few→many→most→overwhelming majority→all

What I got from this is that POE is your best friend lmao

Am I right in the belief that only A and B are the only reasonable answers because they are more broad and generalized? Thats what worked for me in the lessons before and it worked here as well.