IS Political scientists who favot the traditional viewers roter behavior claim that roting in an election does not change a voter sattitude toward the candidates in that election. Focusing on each US election from 1976 to 1996. Ebonya Washington and Sendhil Mullainathan tested this claim by distinguishing between subjects who had iust become old enough to vote (around half of whom actually voted) and otherwise similar subjects who were slightly too young to vote (and thus none of whom voted). Washington and Mullainathan compared the attitudes of the groups of subjects toward the winning candidate two years after each election. Which finding from Washington and Mullainathan's study, if true, would most directly weaken the claim made by people who favor the traditional view of voter behavior? A) Subjects' attitudes toward the winning candidate two years after a given election were strongly predicted by subjects' general political orientation, regardless of whether subjects were old enough to vote at the time of the election. B) Subjects who were not old enough to vote in a given election held significantly more positive attitudes towards the winning candidate two years later than they held at the time of the election. C) Subjects who voted in a given election held significantly more polarized attitudes toward the winning candidate two years later than did subjects who were not old enough to vote in that election. D) Two years after a given election,subjects who voted and subjects who were not old enough to rote were significantly more likely to express negative