Trump vs Clinton – Let him without sin throw the first stone

October 10, 2016 OPINION/NEWS




Hazel Speed

Unlike President Obama, I am not as an English/British person ‘poking my nose’ into American politics.

This is just an observation aimed particularly, but not exclusively, at the British People, especially as earlier in the week Mr Trump had said he would do business with the UK before Europe as opposed to Mr Obama telling us we voted the wrong way after saying it was our country so we are free to vote as we wish in the UK – and we did!

The American political debate yesterday evening was reminiscent of a metaphorical boxing match where points meant all, without dancing around, and if anyone was decked it was Mrs Clinton, as an aspect she was discussing (and all points referred to by both parties morphed into as many political aspects of point scoring as possible across the board), diverse ‘linking’ matters, when near the end of her remarks stated that she was thankful Mr Trump was not in charge of the country. With immediate, beautiful timing and emphasis, he said in a low and calm voice “you would be in Jail” (regarding the thousands of emails deleted and bleach cleaned, etc, referred to in the debate). The audience applauded.

Trump went on to say if he won then he would get his Attorney General to prosecute her. He also added that he was against (going into) Iraq. Mrs Clinton fobbed off difficult questions with a catch-all vacuous comment that there was not time to go into all of his lies, otherwise there would be no time to debate issues. Points were lost on that.

Inevitably, Donald Trump’s locker-room bragging was referred to more than once but with a stronger reply from Trump after another apology, as he made the point we were all thinking – his actions were lewd ‘words’ but Mrs Clinton’s husband as President actually did the ‘deeds’.

He mentioned also that certain women were present in the audience who suffered from President Clinton and were threatened by Mrs Clinton.

I think Mrs Clinton was fazed by that with no retort of any substance, especially when Mr Trump said she knew what was going on.


From left, Clinton accusers Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick and Kathy Shelton sit before the debate – Photo – Scott Olson


He then said that with terrorists across the world beheading people there are more serious issues than these being discussed as not since medieval times have we heard of such things.

That round was won by Trump along with claims (if true)/allegedly, that Mrs Clinton was ensuring reduced payments by various associates to Government which in turn facilitates the funding of Mrs Clinton’s TV ads.

Questions from the audience were given and the last one asked them both what one nice thing would they say about each other. Hillary Clinton had to go first. She made an obtuse remark that she respected Trump’s children and Donald Trump retorted by stating that Hillary Clinton always came out fighting even if he disagreed with most of which she said.

However, he did agree on some minor aspects during the debate, but in a qualified way.

On the one hand Hillary Clinton is experienced within so many high office appointments, especially with her husband at The White House. Donald Trump quickly mentioned at one stage that she knew about Bill Clinton’s actions – the only person in such high Office to act in the way he did.

I was sorry that Donald Trump did not repeat his statement of the Trade Deals with the UK before the EU (as opposed to Mr Obama saying we would be at the back of the queue if we left Europe) – and we have 53 Commonwealth countries by the way.

Hillary Clinton spoke making lengthy remarks (the two minute time limit on them both to speak responding to each question), whereas Donald Trump spoke in bite-sized comments.

With Clinton, trust is the issue and with Trump, the recently disclosed video was key, despite it being over a decade in age, and as he said, they were just words whereas President Clinton carried out actions!

After the programme, Americans were interviewed and quite a number were amazed how two candidates as these got this far.

I was impressed by Donald Trump’s take on the situation in Syria as he made more sense than Hillary Clinton.


Out of the two, I feel that Mrs Clinton should only have stood for the Presidency the last time round as she does not seem in sync with the times.

Mr Trump is already dumbing down and sounding more like a Government Official but is he going to be able to progress to the level of Statesman required for the Office of President?

Leaving aside the element of whether either person would press the nuclear button if ever required and if their judgment call would be that of a sage, then Donald Trump (if he learns the diplomatic role as quickly as he is managing to do currently), would be the one I would vote for as Hillary, when she was First Lady, should have learned enough by her experiences then and since to be able to present some fresh, rather than stale political policies and ideas now.

Mr Trump referred to the fact that Mrs Clinton did not know what ‘C’ on her emails stood for (Classified) and 33,000 missing emails had been bleach-cleaned.

Mr Donald Trump won on points for me if a vote has to come out of the debate with no 3rd choices.

The next and final debate will be interesting as to subject matter.

Mrs Clinton will never beat Mr Trump on financial matters and Mrs Clinton’s experience both in The White House as The First Lady and appointments ever since equips her more in the realms of diplomacy and secrecy of National Security issues for years. Caveat – those private emails!

One thing for sure, young people who presently record sex tapes of any kind should take note how a day may emerge when such things may prevent them from high office when they are older!

Trump’s comments about women were bad, that is for sure, but he was right when he said President Clinton did the actions!

Mr Trump also said Mrs Clinton should be arrested over the missing emails which were deleted/bleach-cleaned!

The arrows hurled at Donald Trump by Mrs Clinton in contrast relied mostly on old ground regarding which Mr Trump had initiated damage limitation/apologies. She also relied on the sex tape – Mr Trump’s bragging in the locker room which was lude and more akin to a teenager going through puberty.

She did not have any retorts to Mr Trump’s statement that she should be arrested re the missing emails and for the fact she had threatened some women present regarding alleged encounters with President Clinton.

For my money, Donald Trump won Round Two of the debate this evening, but my view is irrelevant as I am not an American.





Hazel Speed

Photo (c) Hazel Speed – used by kind permision to Tuck Magazine

Hazel Speed is a Philosopher, Writer, and Artist with various creative projects at differing stages of development. Her flaship project is an animation which has produced a film short: Hazel has also written an E-novel, ‘Just Suppose…!‘ which is available via the attached link.

Art sites:


  1. James October 11, at 14:58

    It's good to know that you don't publish comments unless they praise. Pointing out how this article is just plain not well written won't fly, I see. Well, that's okay. I know not to waste my time with you in the future.

  2. James Peterson October 10, at 20:35

    It's very difficult to take any of this seriously. First, it's not written very well. The very first sentence makes it sound as if President Obama shouldn't be sticking his nose into politics. Or that somehow he's English. Hello? Awkward sentence construction (comma connected sentences, sentences connected with "and" that should be separate, etc.) don't help your credibility. Seriously, isn't any this edited? As by an editor? The word you want is "lewd", not "lude." Bill Clinton's behavior has nothing to do with it. Reprehensible as it may be, he isn't running for president. Donald Trump is. This is the old, tired, but-someone-else-is-worse deflection, and not even a sensible one at that. Regarding Syria, "..he [Trump] made more sense than Hillary Clinton." Are we supposed to just take your word for it? I don't mind if you want to say this, but you offer no follow up on that statement. I could go on, but that's enough. You get the idea. This article is poorly thought out and poorly executed. Your viewpoint is one thing, but just on pure writing grounds, it's hard to see how it got published.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.