English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-10-26 10:53:20 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

3 answers

Two reasons.

First, his campaign was essentially broke. As of the end of the third quarter, his campaign had ;less than $100,000.00 left to pay the bills. He was essentially in a position where, even if he made a good showing in Iowa, he would probably not, barring a miraculous fourth quarter effort, have the money necessary to compete on Super Tuesday.

Second, he was not getting the support he needed to continue, especially in Iowa. While I know that many people on Yahoo Answers dislike polls, candidates place a heavy reliance on internal polls and results of canvassing efforts to determine campaign strategy. The polls have generally shown Senator Brownback not doing particularly well. Senator Brownback knew that he needed a top three finish in Iowa and to out-perform Governor Huckabee to have a chance in the later contests. Based on the published polls, he was not gaining traction (and I assume his campaign operatives were telling him the same thing).

Under these circumstances, especially given how the Republican Party nomination system works, it made sense for Senator Brownback to drop out to give others with similar stands on the issues (such as Governor Huckabee) a chance to become competitive rather than continuing to split the same pool of voters and give other candidates with dramatically different stands on the issues a clear shot at the nomination.

2007-10-26 12:01:38 · answer #1 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 0 0

He got tired of carrying around a fetus in a jar and he ran out of money in his campaign fund.

2007-10-26 18:57:22 · answer #2 · answered by Herr Raging Boehner. 5 · 0 1

?

2007-10-27 19:11:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers