1006G备考日记 by jenny 21天倒计时

jennysongUID: 2756826

只有21天机考了,却还是没有计划没有规律,内心焦虑到极点.
为什么是放假在家,在学校该多好.家里好嘈杂.我该怎么办.
好吧.让他去吧.一切都再也影响不了我.关掉QQ.今晚把A的提纲都列完!!!!!!!!!!

jennysongUID: 2756826

今天背诵了一篇ISSUE一篇ARGUMENT范文，写了一篇A，感觉有收获。但是还是浪费了太多时间在看老罗视频和人聊天上。哎，明天抓紧了。倒计时20天。
一小时写就。
224
During her three years in office, Governor R has shown herself to be a worthy leader. Since she took office, crime has decreased, the number of jobs created per year has doubled, and the number of people choosing to live in our state has increased. These trends are likely to continue if she is reelected. In addition, Ms. R has promised to take steps to keep big companies here, thereby providing jobs for any new residents. Anyone who looks at Ms. R’s record can tell that she is the best-qualified candidate for governor.


The letter recommends that Ms. R is the best-qualified candidate for governor. To support the recommendation the author points out that during Ms. R’s three years in office, the crime rate has decreased and the number of jobs as well as people choosing to live here have increased. The author also cites Ms. R’s promise of keeping big companies in the state and consequently providing more jobs for new residents. I find the argument is logically unconvincing in several respects.

First of all, the argument depend on the assumption that the decline in crime and the rise in the number of jobs and people coming to live in our state are due to Ms. R’s taking office, rather than some other reason. Yet lacking evidence to the contrary it is entirely possible that such great progress was primarily attributed to the economic recovery and the improvement of security system in that area. It is also possible that instead of Ms. R, other governors are in the charge of such issues and it was those governors’ great efforts that make the state more secure and peaceful. Without ruling all other reasons why the state is undergoing such great progress, the argument that Governor R is the best-qualified candidate is dubious at best.

Even if all these are the results of Ms. R’s great efforts, the argument unfairly assumes all conditions on which these trends depend will remain unchanged if Ms. R is reelected. Perhaps the general economy in that area is expected to turn down and therefore some people would lose jobs; or perhaps the environment is getting worse and consequently less people would choose to live here; or perhaps the increasing unemployment will cause more crimes. Without considering these possibilities which may influence the trend the author’s assumption that these trends are likely to continue if she is reelected is dubious.

Furthermore, the article fails to consider any other candidate who might be more suitable than Ms. R. Perhaps he or she is more experienced and brilliant than Ms. R and can handle these issues much better. In short, without weighing Ms. R against alternatives the article’s claim that Ms. R is the best candidate for governor is unconvincing.
Finally, the author’s inference that new residents will get jobs rests on the poor assumption that Ms. R’s promise to take steps to keep big companies here will be committed. Perhaps it is just a promise of Ms. R which can hardly be committed just in order to attract more votes. Or perhaps the big companies already have had enough employees so that they would not provide any more jobs for the new residents.

To sum up, the article has not convinced me that Ms. R is the best-qualified candidate for the governor. To bolster the argument the author should provide clear evidence that Ms. R—and not some other factor—was in fact responsible for the good trends in the state. To better assess the argument I would need to compare near term economic forecasts with economic conditions during the last three years. Finally, I would need to consider Ms. R in light of other alternative candidates.