According to the Associative Property, which expression is equivalent to 30m+(21m−53)+(18−2m) ?(1 point) Responses (49m−53)+16 left parenthesis 49 m minus 53 right parenthesis plus 16 (30m+21m)+(18−2m) left parenthesis 30 m plus 21 m right parenthesis plus left parenthesis 18 minus 2 m right parenthesis 53m−35 53 m minus 35 51m+(−53+18)−2m

To simplify the expression \( 30m + (21m - 53) + (18 - 2m) \) using the Associative Property, we can regroup the terms without changing their sum.

Let's break it down:

1. First, we can rewrite the expression by removing the parentheses:
\[
30m + 21m - 53 + 18 - 2m
\]

2. Now, we can group the like terms:
- Combine the \(m\) terms:
\[
(30m + 21m - 2m)
\]
- Combine the constant terms:
\[
(-53 + 18)
\]

Putting it all together, we get:
\[
(30m + 21m - 2m) + (-53 + 18)
\]

Now, let's compute the sums:
- For the \(m\) terms:
\[
30m + 21m - 2m = 49m
\]
- For the constant terms:
\[
-53 + 18 = -35
\]

So, we arrive at:
\[
49m - 35
\]

Looking at the provided responses, the equivalent expression to \(30m + (21m - 53) + (18 - 2m)\) according to the Associative Property is:
\[
53m - 35
\]

However, if we're seeking a correctly simplified version, the answer appears to contain a mismatch in the options provided, as \( 49m - 35 \) does not exactly match \( 53m - 35 \). Thus, if we only look at \(49m - 35\) from the calculated perspective, that would be the value based on simplified terms.

In conclusion, make sure to reconcile the response expected with options said—reading conditions or values may have included some restructuring errors, seeing \(51m + (-53 + 18) - 2m\) also revolve around such well-documented presentations could imply. However, qualitatively closer alignment of structured expressions hinges typically with conventional evaluation approaches like \(49m - 35\).