Explanation
This question involves analyzing an argument related to an election and identifying which option, if true, would most undermine the argument's conclusion.
A. Lewis's national political experience does not directly relate to the local electoral trend favoring prodevelopment candidates.
B. The fact that prodevelopment mayoral candidates in Bensburg generally attract more financial backing could be seen as supporting the argument rather than weakening it.
C. (Correct Response) If Bensburg is facing serious new problems attributed to overdevelopment, this could shift voter sentiment against prodevelopment candidates, which would weaken the argument that a prodevelopment candidate like Chu will likely win.
D. Lewis's previous work with a prodevelopment mayor does not necessarily weaken the argument; it might even suggest that he has insight into prodevelopment policies.
E. Whether Chu was previously considered a prodevelopment politician does not directly weaken the argument, which is based on the trend of prodevelopment candidates winning, not on Chu's past political identity.
The option that most weakens the argument is option C, as it introduces the possibility that changing circumstances could disrupt the historical trend that the argument relies upon.