undermines the conclusion

I would definitely eliminate A because it seems to talk about something besides the point. Yes, reelection is a subset of election, but we are interested in the much broader group of elections in general and not just reelections. Just because it's true that birds fly, it doesn't mean that all warm blooded animals fly - even though birds are warm blooded.

It's also a bit harsh to say that women did not stand a chance against men simply because the argument never goes that far. We only know that the proportion was smaller, but it could be that it was smaller by maybe 1%, which isn't that much.

E

Its clearly E.

My take option E

My answer is E.

I chose E too. I'm so glad I got it right.

Approach:

Option E is the only one that provides another angle as to why so few women end up contesting elections and if true, it seriously undermines the conclusion.

Choose E because another cause

Answer is E for sure

a defender answer choice is needed here as the reasoning is sound in the argument.

E does this by clearly showing that women face problems,thus attacking the conclusion head on.

On a first look It is E.

..

Conclusion-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.

Only E provides another Way and weakens the conclusion...

OA is E

ANSWER: E

:

Yes. E stands tall. It clearly undermines the conclusion by saying although women are interested in running for the election - and then it precisely explains the alternative reasoning.

i too selected the right option E but it took me half a minute to go through choices.as the conclusion says that there are few women who win election citing the reason few women contest for election and not the difficulty they have winning elections.i looked for a choice weakening this point that women do contest for election but there might be some other reason they are not able to win.please guide me if i am wrong