English: Odd Sentence Set 19

Directions (1-10): Choose the odd sentence out of the given five sentences in each question.

  1. understand the importance of cities and what we can
    achieve through urbanization with responsive infrastructure.
    there were fewer than three such candidates in the 1997-2001 period.
    we need to update our definition of urban areas,
    India needs to fine-tune this vision in light of the aspirations of citizens,
    Option C


  2. key agenda drivers for its cities. In India, such agenda setting
    state capabilities, historical legacy, cultural context and present economic situation.
    the Australian national urban policy document identifies objectives
    would encourage programmes and policies to be integrated
    of productivity, sustainability, livability and governance as
    Option B


  3. for the past two decades. Data assembled by the Trivedi Centre
    For Political Data at Ashoka University suggests that an average of almost eight candidates
    the first runner-up candidate in approximately one in four constituencies (26%).
    in every assembly seat eventually received less than 2% of the vote in state elections that took place in recent years (2012-2017)
    the numbers of such candidates on the ballot has steadily increased
    Option C


  4. as close observers of elections know well, candidates from
    of being “vote-cutters” or “vote-spoilers”, referring to the
    Benefits on the other hand are unclear.
    fact that these candidates may steal away some of
    leading parties frequently suspect these small candidates
    Option C


  5. the anxiety of dominant candidates is in some sense understandable.
    In a first-past-the-post electoral system, small candidates
    matter a great deal more than is conventionally acknowledged.
    In recent state elections (since 2012), small candidates pulled together a combined vote share
    they have to be truly exceptional in order to be granted
    Option E


  6. it does not, however, explain why they should want to.
    Besides relinquishing their deposit, running implies a certain
    while this explains why many more individuals can run,
    their likely votes, and hence precipitate their defeat.
    amount of effort and spending time off from one’s occupation.
    Option D


  7. the process will generate discontent among local party workers is high.
    these illegitimate, and maybe anti-democratic efforts at
    benefitting from the electoral process can take several forms.
    In a relatively common scenario, small candidates are encouraged
    to run by candidates from established parties
    Option A


  8. of remote party higher-ups are put in charge of vetting local hopefuls,
    and when they have significant leverage over whom to pick.
    of the ticket distribution system in most parties. When a group
    the ballot will make a dent in the vote share of one of their competitors.
    the lack of intra-party democracy is in full display in the rather opaque nature
    Option D


  9. the multiplication of candidacies. As has been documented
    the honour of representing the party in elections down the line.
    elsewhere by Milan Vaishnav, parties have a clear preference for rich,
    the rising cost of elections has also indirectly contributed to
    self-financing candidates, as these candidates are alone seen as standing a real chance
    Option B


  10. in exponentially expensive campaigns.
    hopefuls who lack these attributes. Given these well-known biases in the ticket distribution process
    recent years led to rather quixotic efforts from political
    characteristics—wealth or dynastic backgrounds—has also in
    the frequent preference of parties for candidates with elite
    Option A



Related posts

Leave a Comment