Why Trump’s Actions Matter More Than Clinton’s Words

The argument that Donald Trump's past words should be the primary focus overlooks the critical actions he has taken and the failures that highlight his character. While Hillary Clinton's campaign rhetoric and statements are analyzed in depth, her actions often go unscrutinized. To address this, it's essential to emphasize that the focus should be on actions over words.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

A simple and effective counter-argument would be to assert: "I remain more bothered by what Trump has done than what Clinton has said." This directly challenges the premise that Clinton's words should carry more weight.

Let's delve into the actions and behaviors that have raised significant concerns:

Trump's Unchecked Behavior

Trump's actions have been a matter of public scrutiny. Here are several key incidents that have tarnished his reputation:

Pedophilia and Rape Accusations: Trump has faced accusations of pedophilia and rape. These accusations, backed by evidence, raise serious ethical concerns. Whistleblower Allegations: A case where underage girls were involved at parties hosted by Trump, leading to the arrest of the host for which Trump remains a friend, raises further questions about his judgment and character. Email Destruction: Documents show Trump and his company employees destroyed emails that were required to be submitted to the courts, suggesting a pattern of legal evasion. Business Ethics and Legal Issues: Trump has been sued by over 1,300 individuals for a range of issues, from unfair business practices to contract disputes – a pattern of unethical behavior that challenges his merit as a leader. Tax Returns and Tax Evasion Allegations: Trump has refused to release his tax returns, fostering suspicion about the legitimacy of his financial affairs and potential tax fraud. Assault Accusations: At least eleven women have accused Trump of sexual assault, though many of these cases have not been conclusively proven, they emphasize his history of aggressive behavior. Invasive Behavior: Trump has walked in on both teen and adult women in the nude, marking his behavior as highly inappropriate and insensitive.

Given these actions, calling for judgment based solely on what Trump has said is certainly a mistake. His actions have demonstrated a pattern of behavior and decision-making that raises serious ethical and moral questions.

Reversing the Argument: Clinton’s Actions

Instead of comparing words alone, it would be more balanced to evaluate both words and actions. Trump's actions could be compared directly to Hillary Clinton's actions:

Why not compare actions to actions and words to words?

The Case Against Trump

Failure to act based solely on words would be an error. Trump has committed numerous actions that indicate he is not suitable to be President:

Sexual Assault and Impulsive Behavior: His history of sexually assaulting women and his tendency to act impulsively without considering the consequences are deeply troubling. Preparedness and Judgment: His willingness to ignore facts and make decisions without proper preparation or thought suggests a lack of competence and foresight. Russia Interference: His attempts to curry favor with Russian oligarchs for his own gain further cast doubt on his judgment and ethical integrity. Legal and Business Failures: The numerous legal and business failures, from failed business ventures to unresolved legal issues with banks, paint a picture of someone who cannot be trusted with the responsibilities of the presidency.

Considering these points, the problem is not merely the "vulgar things Trump has said" but the business failures, relationship disasters, and ethical breaches that underscore his lack of integrity.

Contrast with Numerous Unproven Accusations Against Clinton

While Trump's actions are well-documented, Hillary Clinton, often accused but less consistently proven, has long been a target of right-wing scrutiny. However, the fact that a considerable portion of the accusations against Clinton have been unproven or exaggerated does not negate the importance of scrutinizing her actions:

Investigations and Scrutiny: Clinton has faced numerous investigations but has largely been exonerated of serious charges. This seems to stem from the political biases and media attention given to her. Brief but Successful Tenure: Despite initial skepticism, Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State and her overall performance in national politics have not shown extensive faults worthy of disqualification. Higher Bar for Investigation: It’s important to note that the political climate is often more forgiving for those in the opposition, leading to a higher bar of scrutiny for Clinton.

Comparing the two candidacies, the critical point is to highlight how Trump's actions and words together present a clear and consistent pattern of unethical behavior, while Clinton’s words and actions, while often controversial, have been less definitively tied to misconduct.

The focus on Clinton's words without scrutinizing her actions ignores the critical importance of a leader's actions in upholding integrity and trust. Thus, Clinton should be judged on her actions, not just her words.