Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 Feb 2017, 23:11

### 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
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2007, 18:24
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (02:41) 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 given?

(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents 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 politicians 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.
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 647
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 296 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2007, 18:56
(E)

Conclusion:
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.

(E) is the exact opposite of the conclusion.
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
CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2583
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 429 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2007, 19:41
Skewed wrote:
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 given?

(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents 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 politicians 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.

E provides an alternative explanation.
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 466
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2007, 22:36
agree on E.
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 466
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2007, 22:37
I'm a senior manager now
SVP
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2492
Followers: 69

Kudos [?]: 747 [0], given: 19

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2007, 23:40
Skewed wrote:
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 given?

(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents 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 politicians 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.

E is clear.
VP
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1092
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 503 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2007, 05:09
E. because is the only one that consider an obstacle to women's willingness to run.
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2007, 05:43
Skewed wrote:
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 given?

(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents 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 politicians 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.

Conclusion: few women win elections not because they have difficulty but because few turn up. Otherwise, if more turn up more will win. The proporting will increase directly

(E) draws a comparison between men and women and reasons out why they do not run... they don't because of insufficient funds

Therefore why not 'A'
Director
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 518
Location: Indonesia
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 209 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2007, 06:59
I will go for E

Amar
Manager
Joined: 19 Aug 2007
Posts: 206
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2007, 08:20
Skewed wrote:
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 given?

(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents 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 politicians 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.

I originally picked E, but in the premise it states that "women who ran for state and national offices were about as likely to win as men."

So, the argument is based on those who are already running, not those who want to run. and, only for that reasoning, only B) makes sense to me (although, I will say, its a pretty crappy answer choice)
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2007
Posts: 64
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2007, 08:28
Skewed wrote:
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 given?

(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents 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 politicians 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.

It is E. The conclusion says that "few women want to run". E refutes it
Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 143
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

06 Dec 2007, 22:15
I picked E too.
Intern
Joined: 29 Jun 2007
Posts: 49
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Dec 2007, 13:26
My answer is B. What is the OA?
Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Dec 2007, 23:43
miketal20 wrote:
My answer is B. What is the OA?

E.
07 Dec 2007, 23:43
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
8 In the United States, of the people who moved from one state 15 22 Dec 2009, 11:54
In the United States, of the people who moved from one state 15 30 Apr 2009, 13:52
15 In the United States, of the people who moved from one state 44 10 Mar 2009, 02:31
9 Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and 32 23 Feb 2009, 16:59
In the United States, of the people who moved from one state 3 31 Aug 2007, 22:30
Display posts from previous: Sort by