Same facts as the previous question: Delegate, who planned to attend the convention of Political Party, reserved a room at Hotel for the seven days scheduled around the convention at the drastically reduced rate of $100 per night. The reduced rate was a special offer made only to delegates who reserved their rooms by paying $400 as an advance deposit for a full seven-night booking at Hotel. Delegate timely paid her deposit. This time, however, Hotel was not destroyed by a fire. Instead, Political Party suddenly moved its convention to another city. What statement is most true? Delegate has a valid argument that she can cancel her reservation and recover her $400 deposit based on frustration of purpose. Delegate has a valid argument that she can cancel her reservation and recover her $400 deposit based on impossibility of performance. Hotel can keep the $400 deposit as liquidated damages, so long as that amount was agreed to by the parties in their contract. Delegate will be liable for the remaining $300 of her reserved price because the parol evidence rule will prevent delegate from introducing evidence of the purpose for which she contracted with Hotel