A Good For Nothing Debate Between Hillary And Trump – OpEd


It was reported that millions of people around the world watched the live debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the two US Presidential candidates. As these two persons aspire to become the President of the most powerful country in the world, many must have expected to listen to a high quality debate concerning US and global economy, world conflicts and peace, the issues relating to liberty and suppression and the responsibility of USA,`which appears to be considering itself as the watchdog of the world.

Unfortunately, to the disappointment of millions of people, the debate happened to become a damp squib and perhaps, giving an impression that both the candidates are not prolific thinkers and lack matured outlook and long term world vision. While some economic issues concerning US were discussed, what ultimately stayed in the mind of the audience was the attempt by both the candidates to accuse each other and question the honesty and integrity of the other person.

The focus of Hillary was to somehow embarrass Trump by calling him a tax dodger and accusing him of fraudulent business practices. Trump responded in a weak manner by calling himself as a smart business man and has acted as per the law. He could not say that he acted based on ethical principles.

For his part, Trump focused on humiliating Hillary by accusing her of destroying some 33,000 emails from the time when she was Secretary of State. Hillary could not give a proper explanation and appeared to be really embarrassed. The debate somewhat became ugly when Trump said that Hillary lacks stamina. Many would have been surprised when Hillary said that she was no longer supporting the Trans-Pacific Partnership Deal and she conveniently ignored when Trump asked “so was it President Obama’s fault?”

The debate moderator too was no better than the two Presidential candidates, as he appeared to give more time to Hillary and also appeared to put more difficult questions to Trump.

All in all, the debate ended like what we usually see between young students at school level ,when one would try to focus more on humiliating and discomforting the opponent rather than using the opportunity to explain his views with conviction in a lucid manner. The younger generation who aspire to occupy high political posts in future would wonder as to whether this would all be the merits and the competence level required for the US Presidential candidates.

What is even more surprising was that several reporters and media personnel immediately hailed Hillary as the winner of the debate though for an impartial and discerning observer, it looked as if neither did better and perhaps, both exposed their inadequacies and limitations.

With two more debates to follow, one would hope that both the candidates would prepare themselves better and put forth more healthy debate that would do justice to the reputation of USA.

Of course, there was one bright spot. At the end of the debate, Trump clearly said that he would support Hillary if she would win the election as the President of USA. This was a gracious remark that does not seem to have received the appreciation that it deserves from the media.

N. S. Venkataraman

N. S. Venkataraman is a trustee with the "Nandini Voice for the Deprived," a not-for-profit organization that aims to highlight the problems of downtrodden and deprived people and support their cause. To promote probity and ethical values in private and public life and to deliberate on socio-economic issues in a dispassionate and objective manner.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *