Identify the question
The question is asking us what would weaken the success of political strategist's plan
Deconstruct the argument
PS: doms poli of PT X contrad. w/ MS voters BUT vote PT X b/c fogn poli
PT Y prove PT X doesn't rep their doms poli => win MS voters back
state the goal
The political strategist suggests that Party Y can win back the middle-class voters who support Party X by proving to those voters that Party X does not represent their interest in domestic policy, believing that some middle-class voters support Party X purely due to the party’s appeals about foreign policy. I need to find the answer that makes the political strategist's plan likely to fail.
from right to wrong
A. Many in the middle class who support Party X for its foreign policies also support its domestic policies and are fully aware of the implications of those policies.
=> this attacks the premise of what the political strategist believe, thus weakening the argument
B. Most middle-class supporters of Party X care about foreign policy and know very little about its domestic policies.
=> direct contradiction, if this is true, then the political strategist's plan is likely to succeed
C. Long-term domestic policy sometimes conflicts with short-term domestic policy.
=> out of scope and irreverent to the passage
D. There are topics on which Party X and Party Y have a significant agreement.
=> irrelevant, makes no impact
E. Some middle-class voters are concerned about both domestic and foreign policy.
=>irrelevant distinction, we don't need the distinctions among the middle-class voters