(2) Why did he lose the nomination?
As to question (1), go to your library, or take some college classes, or just peruse the internet. There's a wealth of information out there and it certainly wouldn't fit into a single response here, which I suspect you'd categorically reject anyway.
As to question (2), he didn't get enough votes.
I have spent countless hours researching the subject of evolution and have found this - there is no “smoking gun” or “missing link” that changes evolution from theory to proven science. In fact, the theory of evolution and its components have had to change dramatically to meet new scientific findings. Some have even disproven previously “accepted facts” of evolution that then were changed and swept away to fit with the new science.
This is not the forum for a debate on Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, but I was curious why you believe it. I find it to be very laughable that we have been duped into accepting this as fact when the science behind it is very weak and is also open to other interpretations, since none of it can be observed or proven by experimentation (the basic tenets of science).
I took a college class on evolution and checked out "Icons of Evolution" from the library at the same time. Quite a bit of the content from my college text was addressed in Icons. My text was full of false information, distortions and lies. If there was so much supporting data and evidence for evolution, why would text books still need to include false evidence? There is more convincing evidence that the sun rotates around the earth than that all life evolved from a common ancestor IMO.