[W]hile Internet politics may revitalize participation, it may not have the same effect on parties. Instead, the Internet promises to create more customized relationships between candidates and supporters that could strengthen their political bonds. The success of Obama’s Internet campaign rested in part on a web presence that users could tailor to suit their needs and wishes so that they could take the initiative, if so inclined, to organize events, write testimonials, give money, volunteer, or persuade friends and neighbors about the strengths of the candidate.. . . Unlike television, Internet communication is individualized and personalized, and candidates who know how to use it can do so to create a loyal following. It is an open question whether the social networking tools made possible by technological advances and effectively employed by the Obama campaigns will continue to engage voters when other candidates try to use them, or whether 2008 and 2012 will stand alone as campaigns featuring a charismatic candidate who understood how to present himself online. Hillary Clinton’s struggle to reach Millennial voters speaks to the importance of the messenger over the medium.Source: John Kenneth White and Matthew R. Kerbel, Party On! Political Parties from Hamilton and Jefferson to Trump, 2017.Given the evolution of campaign communication described in the passage, which of the following is a way that political candidates most likely would use these tools to reach the broadest possible base of supporters?ACreating a direct e-mail campaign targeting college students to increase campaign donationsBUsing social media tools to target different demographic and political groups with messages designed to appeal to themCHolding large political rallies to appeal to base constituents and establish an ideologically unified partyDPublishing op-ed columns about prominent campaign issues in national newspapers

Then try StudyFetch, the AI-powered platform that can answer your questions and teach you more about it!