GWD17-Q9 thanks~

Press Secretary: 
Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project
cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts
controlled by opposition parties.  They
offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in
such districts.  But all of the canceled
projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected
nonpartisan auditors.  So the President’s
choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the
press secretary’s argument depends?

A.     
Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the
President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.

B.      
The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in
the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s
party.

C.     
The number of projects canceled was a significant
proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the
government in the near future.

D.     
The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by
the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects
canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.

E.      
Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded
by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government
projects.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

答案是B，谁能帮我解释一下，谢谢~~

嘿，我怎么觉得选D啊

B 说被视为浪费的项目不全是本党街区的，也就是说有一部分是反对党街区的，也就是说 反对党街区被废的项目 是有一部分 因为浪费被废的， 不是歧视。    这条路看似合理，  但原文已经有一句话说90%被废的项目都是反对党街区的，并且所有被废项目都被视为了浪费， 所以架上面那个桥根本无意义。

D 这么个思路，说因浪费被废的项目里面至少 本党派街区的 不比 反对党街区的贵，  这很合理啊， 去非得话， 比反对党街区的贵，还90%都废相对便宜反对党街区的，这不就有歧视了么，就削弱了呗

可是文中只是说90%并没有提贵或不贵呀，感觉b更有根据些。不对之处请指正。