6 Reasons Keystone is a bad deal

[jimbo]

It is not just the pipeline jobs at stake. The refineries do not run themselves, workers are required, and the jobs run from entry level to executives. Something for everybody. Ships need to be filled and crews are required to operate them. They eat food produced on farms and drive cars built by workers.

Who knows how many jobs are lost when a business opportunity is lost.

 

[Cowboy]

It is not just the pipeline jobs at stake. The refineries do not run themselves, workers are required, and the jobs run from entry level to executives. Something for everybody. Ships need to be filled and crews are required to operate them. They eat food produced on farms and drive cars built by workers.

Who knows how many jobs are lost when a business opportunity is lost.

Exactly, and as I mentioned before the states benefit finacially as well in most cases. But the countys, townships and small community buisiness's also thrive from the folks that maintain the pipelines by local spending. There is really no way to figure out how much is lost by this pipeline not being allowed to procede, nor is there a good reason for it to be held up any longer IMO.

 

[joec]

It is not just the pipeline jobs at stake. The refineries do not run themselves, workers are required, and the jobs run from entry level to executives. Something for everybody. Ships need to be filled and crews are required to operate them. They eat food produced on farms and drive cars built by workers.

Who knows how many jobs are lost when a business opportunity is lost.

You think the refineries will add more people because of this or just refine it with those already working? I don't know why but I tend to doubt it really but will give it the benefit or doubt.

 

[Kane]

American Voices

Obama Rejects Keystone Pipeline

January 20, 2012 | ISSUE 48•03
Citing environmental concerns, the Obama administration is rejecting the proposed Canada-to-U.S. oil pipeline, but may reconsider if the builders propose a different route. What do you think?

• 
  
  I can’t help but think of all the lost jobs, like cleaning up oil spills and delivering bottled water for people to bathe in.
  Laura Pickering
  Systems Analyst

• 
  
  Have they considered using a bucket brigade instead?
  Steve Swanson
  Thread Marker

• 
  
  I'm sick and tired of these libtard faggot continental aquifers getting in the way of real economic growth.
  Charlie Edwards
  Attorney

 

[Cowboy]

It seems it dont really matter anymore and of coarse the annointed one lays all of the blame on the republicans.

Canada Pledges to Sell Oil to Asia After Obama Rejects Keystone Pipeline


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ia-after-obama-rejects-keystone-pipeline.html

 

[joec]

It seems it dont really matter anymore and of coarse the annointed one lays all of the blame on the republicans.

Canada Pledges to Sell Oil to Asia After Obama Rejects Keystone Pipeline


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ia-after-obama-rejects-keystone-pipeline.html

I find that bold line funny CB since the plan was to refine it here then sell it to Asia any how. That was Canada's goal from the start to stop selling to us and get more money for their stuff on the open market.

 

[Cowboy]

I find that bold line funny CB since the plan was to refine it here then sell it to Asia any how. That was Canada's goal from the start to stop selling to us and get more money for their stuff on the open market.

And where are your facts? You need to start listening to someone else rather then Palosi Joe.


http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pel...ned-overseas-markets-not-so-says-oil-industry
“It wasn’t for domestic consumption,” she repeated. “And that’s really an important point because the advertising is quite to the contrary.” Pelosi said the pipeline shouldn’t be built based on the assumption that the oil is staying in the U.S. – “because it isn’t.”
But the American Petroleum Institute, an industry trade group, told CNSNews.com that 90 percent of fuel refined in the United States is used in this country.
“I don’t know where Nancy Pelosi gets her information from,” said Rayola Dougher, senior economic adviser for the American Petroleum Institute (API). “I know that has been one of the talking points from the opposition here to the development of this project, but I cannot think of another project more in the national interest than something like this,” she said.

 

[Cowboy]

This is the bottom line of why Obama has once again rejected it.


"liberal donors threatened to cut off funds to Obama's re-election campaign to protest the project, which opponents say would transport "dirty oil" that requires huge amounts of energy to extract.
Obama said his decision was not based on the pipeline's merits but on what he called an arbitrary Feb. 21 deadline set by Republicans in Congress. They set the deadline as part of a tax bill that Obama signed into law in late December."

 

[joec]

And where are your facts? You need to start listening to someone else rather then Palosi Joe.


http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pel...ned-overseas-markets-not-so-says-oil-industry
“It wasn’t for domestic consumption,” she repeated. “And that’s really an important point because the advertising is quite to the contrary.” Pelosi said the pipeline shouldn’t be built based on the assumption that the oil is staying in the U.S. – “because it isn’t.”
But the American Petroleum Institute, an industry trade group, told CNSNews.com that 90 percent of fuel refined in the United States is used in this country.
“I don’t know where Nancy Pelosi gets her information from,” said Rayola Dougher, senior economic adviser for the American Petroleum Institute (API). “I know that has been one of the talking points from the opposition here to the development of this project, but I cannot think of another project more in the national interest than something like this,” she said.

It is in the companies own proposal as stated by them. And you believe the 90% figure well I guess some of it might be true however that other 10% isn't as well as just the oil we ship overseas on the open market which the US does do also.

 

[Cowboy]

It is in the companies own proposal as stated by them.

Bullshit, it was not stated by them at all as I posted in another post, The gal that wrote the article twisted their words that she got from an anto oil site, which I also posted the direct link too.

Heres the link to what you call facts from the BS article you first posted.

http://www.dirtyoilsands.org/

 

[joec]

Bullshit, it was not stated by them at all as I posted in another post, The gal that wrote the article twisted their words that she got from an anto oil site, which I also posted the direct link too.

I suggest then you look up their proposel for this pipeline then and not tell me it is bull shit. Her ariticle mentioned yes so even she seems to know it also. Oh wait she lied because she is a liberal lesbian I forgot but Fox published her piece though.

 

[Cowboy]

I suggest then you look up their proposel for this pipeline then and not tell me it is bull shit. Her ariticle mentioned yes so even she seems to know it also. Oh wait she lied because she is a liberal lesbian I forgot but Fox published her piece though.

Nevermind Joe, its obvious to me you are just jumping from thread to thread just to argue any topic you can to defend Obama and his administration. Jjust keep beleiving the bullshit and enjoy this article, I am sure it fits everything you beleive in.



Obama Administration Says No to Oil, Yes to Biofuels

(CNSNews.com) - Two days after President Barack Obama blocked construction of a major oil pipeline, his administration is touting its efforts to expand domestic production of renewable energy.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced Friday that his agency has approved a $25-million conditional loan guarantee to build a 55,000-square-foot biorefinery plant in Iowa.
The Fiberight facility will produce cellulosic ethanol by converting municipal solid waste and other industrial pulps into "advanced biofuels," the news release said.
The project is expected to create 38 jobs and save 16 jobs. By contrast, expansion of the Canada-Texas Keystone XL pipeline would create thousands of jobs; some estimates say as many as 20,000.
"This project is another step the Obama administration is taking to support production of a new generation of renewable fuels, in order to build an active biofuels and biomass production industry in every region of the country," said Vilsack. "Investments in renewable energy create jobs and reduce America's dependence on foreign oil."
The USDA news release notes that Americans import "just over half (60%) of our transportation fuels," and it says the U.S. "can do more to meet the President's goal of reducing our net fuel imports by one-third by 2025."
Proponents of the Keystone XL pipeline agree that the U.S. can do more to reduce fuel imports.
“Until this pipeline is constructed, the U.S. will continue to import millions of barrels of conflict oil from the Middle East and Venezuela and other foreign countries who do not share democratic values Canadians and Americans are privileged to have,” said Russ Girling, TransCanada’s president and chief executive officer, in a statement on Wednesday announcing that his company will reapply for a Keystone XL permit.
At Secretary Vilsack's direction, USDA says it is working to develop the national biofuels industry, producing energy from non-food sources in every region of the country.

USDA says it is “conducting and encouraging research into innovative new energy technologies and processes, helping companies build biorefineries, and supporting farmers, ranchers, and businesses taking risks to pursue new opportunities in biofuels.”
USDA's Biorefinery Assistance Program was authorized by Congress under the 2008 Farm Bill.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-administration-says-no-oil-yes-biofuels

 

[joec]

I tell you what Cowboy, you don't have a clue what I think and never will. Either way it seems you can't accept my opinion for what it is and must argue with it. I have stated how I feel on this clearly so I feel no need at this point to explain it more. You have the same right to believe what you want anytime you want.

 

[Ross 650]

Howdy Joe,
got a surprise for you!! Obummer cant walk on water. I cant believe that you back anything that the loser does or says. He just showed his incompetence by blocking the pipe line for purley political motives. Remember how he ranted against carbon fuels when he was just a Chicago thug running for the White House??? Sorry but to most folks it is obvious what a loser he is. Have a goodun!!!!!

 

[joec]

Howdy Joe,
got a surprise for you!! Obummer cant walk on water. I cant believe that you back anything that the loser does or says. He just showed his incompetence by blocking the pipe line for purley political motives. Remember how he ranted against carbon fuels when he was just a Chicago thug running for the White House??? Sorry but to most folks it is obvious what a loser he is. Have a goodun!!!!!

Why, do you find it surprising hell others here have thought I did from the beginning. I do actually happen to agree with much of what he has tried to do and watched the republicans block everything he tries. They are the ones who stated their goal was to make him a one term president after the 8 years the gave us. I just happen to see this country in its present form coming to an end and becoming a foot note in history. It doesn't mean a damn thing who was in office after Bush as it is a forgone conclusion at this point. Just mark it down as I have no faith in my fellow man as most are just plain sheep.

 

[Melensdad]

Of course the GOP wants him to be a 1 term president. They DISAGREE with his policies.

Why would they want him around for 2 terms if they disagree with him?

Why would they help him destroy America if they hope to save it?

 

[joec]

Of course the GOP wants him to be a 1 term president. They DISAGREE with his policies.

Why would they want him around for 2 terms if they disagree with him?

Why would they help him destroy America if they hope to save it?

As I said I happen to agree with what he wants to do, and disagree with what the republican want. Their ideas have been pretty much proven to not work so time to try a different approch. Just my opinion on it.

 

[Cowboy]

Of course the GOP wants him to be a 1 term president. They DISAGREE with his policies.

Why would they want him around for 2 terms if they disagree with him?

Why would they help him destroy America if they hope to save it?

Well after all Obama said it his self, but as allways he is not a man of his word.

Barack Obama said he should only serve one term if he could not fix the economy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SmRgaKfWMPA

 

[Danang Sailor]

As I said I happen to agree with what he wants to do, and disagree with what the republican want. Their ideas have been pretty much proven to not work so time to try a different approch. Just my opinion on it.

So, you want a President who is a Cheap-Jack Chicago Machine Politician, a man who feels compelled to bow to
Mideast princes, who directs all government branches and employees to never use words such as "jihad" and "Islamic
terrorism" (upon pain of firing), and who has stated that the Muslim Brotherhood is not dedicated to our destruction
(even though they admit they are)?

Joe, you are in luck!! That's just what you've got! My tastes run in a different direction. Sorry.

 

[joec]

So, you want a President who is a Cheap-Jack Chicago Machine Politician, a man who feels compelled to bow to
Mideast princes, who directs all government branches and employees to never use words such as "jihad" and "Islamic
terrorism" (upon pain of firing), and who has stated that the Muslim Brotherhood is not dedicated to our destruction
(even though they admit they are)?

Joe, you are in luck!! That's just what you've got! My tastes run in a different direction. Sorry.

Yes according to you and others think he is a Muslim, not born in the US, every thing he says is a lie, here to turn the country over to Europe. You know I kind of feel sorry for you guys and you think I've drank the kool aid, you guys are taking it in the veins.

So have it your way DS I sure can't tell you anything since you know the truth in spite of the facts about what is really going on. I love your list by the way, just more BS of things you don't seem to comprehend.

 

[Danang Sailor]

Yes according to you and others think he is a Muslim, not born in the US, every thing he says is a lie, here to turn the country over to Europe. You know I kind of feel sorry for you guys and you think I've drank the kool aid, you guys are taking it in the veins.

So have it your way DS I sure can't tell you anything since you know the truth in spite of the facts about what is really going on.

You like facts, so here is a fact check:

I never said he was a Muslim, although he did.

I never said he was not born in this country - I do have unanswered questions about his SSN.

He has lied but that is the province of politicians, isn't it? My problem is the nature of some of those lies.

"Turn the country over to Europe"? Where did that come from? It's certain I never said nor implied it. However, his
actions in regard to the very real threat we face from Islamic Supremacists are frightening to me. If as a child you hide your
head under the covers because of the monsters under your bed it is one thing; if you hide your head under the covers as an
adult when there are real monsters trying to destroy your home it is quite another.

You recently said (today I believe) that you were certain this country was at a point where it cannot be saved. It is
entirely possible that you're right, but some of us are not going to sit by and let it go down quietly. I have a hard time with
the idea that you are not only convinced that this is irreversible, but are so apathetic that you're willing to support
ideas that are pushing us ever faster toward that end.

Maybe I have swallowed someone's Kool-Aid, but if so it was more likely mixed by Washington, Jefferson, Sherman,
Heinlein, and their like than it was by such as the Anointed One. His policies are anathema to the principles that built
this country.

 

[joec]

You like facts, so here is a fact check:

I never said he was a Muslim, although he did.


I never said he was not born in this country - I do have unanswered questions about his SSN.

I didn't say you did I said some do.


He has lied but that is the province of politicians, isn't it? My problem is the nature of some of those lies.

"Turn the country over to Europe"? Where did that come from? It's certain I never said nor implied it. However, his
actions in regard to the very real threat we face from Islamic Supremacists are frightening to me. If as a child you hide your
head under the covers because of the monsters under your bed it is one thing; if you hide your head under the covers as an
adult when there are real monsters trying to destroy your home it is quite another.

Recent statements by Mitt Romney, Rush Limbaugh and others.

You recently said (today I believe) that you were certain this country was at a point where it cannot be saved. It is
entirely possible that you're right, but some of us are not going to sit by and let it go down quietly. I have a hard time with
the idea that you are not only convinced that this is irreversible, but are so apathetic that you're willing to support
ideas that are pushing us ever faster toward that end.

I think he is actually trying to stop it but again opinion on all of our parts as to what it will take to stop it and then turn it around.

Maybe I have swallowed someone's Kool-Aid, but if so it was more likely mixed by Washington, Jefferson, Sherman,
Heinlein, and their like than it was by such as the Anointed One. His policies are anathema to the principles that built
this country.

Some of my answers in blue inside your tirrade above in bold, italic, blue text within your quote.


You should also read a bit more of what Washington, Jefferson and others wrote about what they believed, instead of just the catch phrases many use. Hell Jefferson is considered bad in current day text books used in schools today. I also don't attribute Obama with anything anointed, as I consider him a man that is trying to do what he thinks is right for the United States of America and as he was elected to his office by a pretty good margin of the population then you are stuck with him if you don't like him. If not then you get a vote later this year for what it will be worth to perhaps put Mitt, Newt, Paul or Santorum in to replace him. Just be very carefully of what you wish for as you might just get it.

 

[Cowboy]

Here is another interesting related article.

Obama plays energy politics while China and Cuba drill wells



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opini...na-and-cuba-drill-wells/2119211#ixzz1kFPlkhgs
How odd that President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton couldn't make a final decision on the proposed Keystone XL pipeline by the Feb. 21 deadline set by congressional Republicans. TransCanada, which would use private investment to build the $7 billion project, filed its application for environmental approval in 2008. The State Department conducted exhaustive studies and approved the application in 2010 and again last year, apparently clearing the way for a pipeline to move oil from Canada's rich tar sand region of Alberta to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast. So now Obama decides against issuing a permit for the project because of "the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people." He previewed this disingenuous ruling last November when he cited environmental concerns in delaying final approval until after the 2012 election. That came shortly after environmentalists encircled the White House with a human chain to protest the pipeline. Obama clearly has his eye on the big prize: millions of campaign dollars and thousands of campaign volunteers from the environmental movement for the coming campaign. Obama is angering another key part of his electoral supporters, the labor unions that desperately want the estimated 20,000 jobs the pipeline would create. But Big Labor is not as monolithic as most people think. For every construction worker, pipefitter and welder who would benefit from Keystone XL, there are many more unionists who are siding with Big Green so they can stay in the good graces of the White House and get the goodies that will be dispensed in a second Obama term. Never mind the benefits to the country that would accrue from the ancillary jobs created by the project and from the oil that would come from our steadfast friends to the north.
While Obama dithers on Keystone, America's chief energy competitors are making hay on the international energy market. Canadian officials have made it clear they will build a pipeline that will either go south to supply the United States or west to supply China. Officials in Beijing are probably cheering for Obama's supposed concern for the environment. The Chinese are also rapidly consolidating their status as Brazil's preferred partner in developing the South American company's rich offshore oil resources. And China's government-controlled energy industry is investing substantial sums in Canadian and U.S. exploration and drilling firms. It never hurts to own a substantial piece of your competitor's key industry.
Then there is Cuba, which just this week saw the arrival off its northern coast of the Chinese-built Scarabeo 9 drilling rig. The Spanish energy giant Repsol will use the Scarabeo 9 to drill wells located about 70 miles off the Florida Keys in the Gulf of Mexico in waters claimed by Cuba. Repsol is working in a partnership with Norway's Statoil and a unit of India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp. The Scarabeo 9 will also be used by Malaysia's Petronas, which has entered into a partnership with Russia's Gazprom Neft to drill at least one Gulf well in the Cuban waters. Quite a contrast to the Obama policy of putting virtually all U.S. offshore waters off-limits for energy production.



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opini...na-and-cuba-drill-wells/2119211#ixzz1kFPBRVsL​

 

[jimbo]

And in another related story (from Newsmax)

Obama and the other greenies don't want oil to exist. Last I heard Obama is claiming that Congress gave him 60 days, less than enough time to make the decision, even though the decision had all been made.

However, I blame the idiots with an R after their name presently in DC for the problem. No one could seriously believe that the outcome would be any different than it is.

. EPA Threatens North Dakota Oil Boom Oil production in North Dakota has boomed to the point that the state now produces nearly as much oil each day as OPEC member Ecuador.
But a decision by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could bring a halt to the boom that has virtually eliminated unemployment in North Dakota.
The state now has 200 rigs pumping 440,000 barrels of oil daily in the Bakken shale formation, according to the Heartland Institute. The state’s unemployment rate is holding at just 3.5 percent, with many oil industry jobs paying more than $100,000 a year, and “we have 18,000 jobs looking for people,” North Dakota Republican Rep. Rick Berg told The Hill.
“If our country’s GDP grew at 7 percent, as it does in [my] state, most of our problems would be over in two years.”
The North Dakota legislature is using some of the state’s oil revenue to fund $1.2 billion in infrastructure improvements, including roads and schools. Public schools will receive $340 million in oil-related revenues over the next two years, and oil money will pay for a disaster relief fund and a reduction in property taxes.
Also, the legislature has ordered that 30 percent of the funds from the state’s 6.5 percent oil extraction tax be sent to the state’s Legacy Fund, which cannot be touched until 2017, when accrued interest will become available for spending.
One reason for the boom: “The regulatory environment was already low in North Dakota, certainly better than California’s and some other oil-producing states,” said Brett Narloch, executive director of the North Dakota Policy Council.
“As we move forward with oil production, I expect the business environment to get better."
Most of the Bakken shale production is occurring on private land, but analysts and state legislators fear the EPA may still seek to shut it down, the Institute reported.
The federal agency is currently investigating hydraulic fracturing (fracking) production techniques, which are used in shale oil production.
Narloch said: “If the EPA decides to ban fracking, that shuts down the entire industry since so many of the wells operate by that procedure. It would kill this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.”

 

[FrancSevin]

Ya beat me to it Jimbo.

Te President made an agreement with Congress to decide within 60 days. They made the agreement in a good faith effort to complete other needed legislation. He did not. Bari knew ful well whether or not 60 days was enough time.

Here is more from that same article.



Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has blasted President Barack Obama for siding with “radical” environmentalists and shelving plans for the Keystone XL pipeline.
The 1,700-mile pipeline would have brought oil from Canada to refineries in Texas, created thousands of jobs, and lessened America’s reliance on Middle East oil. Environmentalists claimed it posed the threat of an oil leak.
House Republicans gave Obama 60 days to approve or reject the $7 billion project, but Obama said the deadline did not allow time to assess the environmental and health impacts and squelched the pipeline plan, at least for the immediate future.
Inhofe released the following statement: "President Obama sided with his radical environmental friends and their job-killing global warming agenda instead of a majority of the American people who would have welcomed the tens of thousands of jobs the Keystone pipeline would have created.
"President Obama's decision shows his unwavering commitment to his global warming agenda which seeks to eliminate oil, gas, and coal, and raise energy and gas prices on every American.
"President Obama has now squandered one of the best job-creating opportunities he has ever had.
"Given the current tensions with Iran over its nuclear program and their threats to choke off the Strait of Hormuz, the president's decision was reckless — with little regard to the threat America faces from its dependence on Middle East oil.
"Global warming alarmist Bill McKibben said that the president's decision was 'brave.' Well, he is taking a big risk: By killing jobs today he could very well lose his own job come November."
Inhofe told Newsmax in an interview last year that the Obama administration is “trying to kill oil and gas” by refusing to allow the United States to exploit its abundant natural resources in an effort to drive the country toward green energy.
Inhofe is a steadfast critic of manmade global warming alarmists. His new book “The Hoax,” due out in August, focuses on what he calls the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people — that catastrophic global warming is the result of manmade gases.

 

[mak2]

Would the pipeline lessen the US dependence on forigen oil or not? That is something factual, will the oil stay in the US or go overseas?

 

[Melensdad]

Would the pipeline lessen the US dependence on forigen oil or not?

YES because not only would it carry Canadian oil, which is imported from Canada, but it would also carry US domestic oil.

Further, it would replace the LOW GRADE imported oil from Venesuala, which requires extra refining and replace it with lighter weight, easier, cheaper to refine domestic and Canadian oil. Much of our domestic fuel is refined from the lighter weight oils, so its likely that the refined gas would stay here.

 

[FrancSevin]

Would the pipeline lessen the US dependence on forigen oil or not? That is something factual, will the oil stay in the US or go overseas?

Actually that is irrellavent. Oil is a world commodity
Therefore the question is a straw man argument. A ruse.

What it does do is effect the balance of trade as Domestic production could create a surplus. If not on the whole, then regionaly.

We import millions of tonnes of Agricultural products, produce mostly. Yet our trade surplus in agriculture is a boom for the economy. Much as our farm industry is an economic export surplus, so could be our crude and refined oil production.

As it is, we are politicaly at the mercy of some of our enimies and in debt to some of our so-called allies. Increasing domestic production would change that.

The Chineese have proven the axiom to be true. Man will burn it all, every drop. Greenies be dammed. So the Presidents choices are irrellavent to the environment, in fact dangerous, and not in the best interests of the Nation, or the planet.

 

[mak2]

I tried to make that point early in the thread. I was thinking over Bobs post about it reducing dependence on outside oil producers. I give, I am for the pipeline because I think it is better for the environemtn in the long run. I am not even sure about the jobs besides actual construction jobs.

Actually that is irellavent. Oil is a world commodity
Therefore the question is a straw man argument. A ruse.

What it does do is effect the balance of trade as Domestic production could create a surplus. If not on the whole, then regionaly.

We import millions of tonnes of Agricultural products, produce mostly. Yet our trade surplus in agriculture is a boom for the economy. Much as our farm industry is an economic export surplus, so could be our crude and refined oil production.

As it is, we are politicaly at the mercy of some of our enimies and in debt to some of our so-called allies. Increasing domestic production would change that.

The Chineese have proven the axiom to be true. Man will burn it all, every drop. Greenies be dammed. So the Presidents choices are irrellavent to the environment, in fact dangerous, and not in the best interests of the Nation, or the planet.

 

[Dargo]

Just be very carefully of what you wish for as you might just get it.

There are an awful lot of people saying exactly that about Obama!

I'll readily admit, based on how pathetic Obama has been, I will actually vote against Obama if need be just to do my part from preventing him from destroying what is left of our country and not putting my children and grand children deep in debt because a bunch of people were afraid of being called "racists" and voted for a man clearly not capable or qualified to be president.