I don't really think that any of those arguments are actually good. However, answer B is wrong because political parties won't necessarily lose financial support if somebody votes against them. it also doesn't really fit as an argument to why you should vote even though the other party will probably win. Number C is not logical because you don't just strt parties because the party you support loses. That way all the existing parties will lose votes and not only the ones you are against. Answer D is just a very bad argument. Think about, would you change where you proably live all your life just because they have more influence on the vote? What about your job, friends and family. And if they mean for you to fly or ride to another state just to vote and then come back, that bad too because it's expensive.
The statement that best summarizes what George Calvert, Roger Williams, and William Penn all had in common is that they all supported a version of religious freedom. The correct answer is D.
