It is currently 21 Oct 2017, 01:58

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 413

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Location: Lungi
Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2004, 21:18
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:53) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and national offices were about as likely to win as men. However, only about fifteen percent of the candidates for these offices were women. Therefore, the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion above?

a.last year the proportion of female incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the number of male incumbent who won reelection
b.Few women who run for state and national offices run against other women.
c.Most women who have no strong desire to be politician s never run for state and national offices.
d.The proportion of people holding local offices who are women is smaller than the proportion of people holding state and national offices who are women.
e.Many more women than men who want to run for state and national offices do not because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns.

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 155

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Location: New York

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2004, 21:26
ALthough I am not certain on this one. In <2 Id go with E. Its not that they dont want to run, they dont have money to do so.
_________________

---------------------------------------------------
The more I learn, the more I realize I know nothing!
----------------------------------------------------

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4285

Kudos [?]: 528 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2004, 00:57
It clearly boils down to B and E. B may be confusing at first but if you take the time to analyze it, you will see that it is wrong. Say there are 100 candidates and 15 are women. Whether or not those 15 women run against each other will not justify the reason why there are so few women running. On the other hand, E explicitly mentions the cause of women not running as a being financial issue. Let's say there were 50 women willing to run but that because of financial constraints, only 15 could run, then can we say that there were few women who wanted to run? No. 50 actually wanted to run. E is best as it weakens the argument.
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 528 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 290

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Location: USA

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2004, 05:29
E for me too......nice explanation Paul!!

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2004, 11:32
I will go with E.

The argument is talking about wish of the women.

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

03 Apr 2004, 11:32
Display posts from previous: Sort by