I feel like the best way to attack MP questions is to hunt, in order to avoid getting distracted by other plausible ACs. Thoughts??

In a real-time scenario where I didn't have time to closely analyze AC B and didn't anticipate beforehand, I would have most likely picked the wrong answer.

This was a cool one. One way that made it easier to think was supplementing "In addition.......here's another premise that supports why hard surfaces help with running speed". I guess I interpreted the stem differently from Kevin though lol. I thought it was asking us to select an AC that added support to the argument.

When it doubt, focus on the subject of the argument. Truthfully I did not understand AC B but I focused on how the argument still vouches for the candidate simply by claiming the belief to be false based on some condition. Regardless of the belief, the candidate can still hold views that are incompatible to public interest if he is subtly coerced into believing the same things as the wealthy sponsor orrrr maybe the candidate's thoughts align with the rich guy right from the start. Either way candidate can't be vouched for and the B gave me that.

Anyone have good time-saving tips? How do you get better at moving faster when it comes to problems like these?

Omg I pre-phrased it as "most students received a B- or higher" and then selected C because I got excited that I found the right answer. I'm currently cry laughing lol

In respect to AC E, who speaks like that? LOL