Editorial: Support This political party has repeatedly expressed the view that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal. ██ █████ ██████████ ████████ ███ ████ █████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ███ ████████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██████ ██ ███████ █████████████
The author concludes that the party’s policy is inconsistent. This is based on the fact that the party has expressed the following views at different times:
Increasing spending on education is a worthy goal.
The government should not increase spending on education.
One view expressed by the party is that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal. Is that inconsistent with, at other times, thinking that the government should not increase spending on education? Not necessarily. Maybe increasing spending on education is a worthy goal, but there are times when there are even more worthy goals, so the government should increase spending for other things instead of education. There’s nothing inherently contradictory about the views expressed.
It’s not clear what we should anticipate, but we should go into the answers with the understanding that the author assumes that the party’s expression of both views is somehow inconsistent.
The argument in the editorial ███████ ██ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████
It is inconsistent ███ █ ██████████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ █ ██████ ████ ███ ██ ████ ███████ ██████████ ████████ ██ ██████████
A consistent course ██ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ██████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ████
Even if a ████ ██ █ ███████ ████ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████████ ███ ██ ███████ ███
A consistent political ██████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ██████ ████ █████████ █ ██████ ████ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████
Members of one █████████ █████ █████ ████ ████████████ █████ ██ ███ ██ ████ ████████ █ █████████ ██████