"Losers" is a term mostly used by middle schoolers.

[busterbrown]

when “goofing” on someone they don’t like....

Perfect discription Donald (You Ass) for those who seek pure and evil destruction! Just perfect!

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/05/trump-calls-manchester-terrorist-losers

[RadiationTherapy]

1. It's not very different from clinging to a word like "deplorable" to summarize far more

heinous thoughts and behaviors. I prefer articulating the hate and prejudices people violently spit at the world. Of course, Trump is pretty inarticulate, so too bad for me, I guess.

[Orrex]

5. Actually, it's very different

Trump is (allegedly) the President of the United States and (nominally) the leader of the free world. His words have vastly greater impact than the words of a million online personalities.

Further, we're not using "deplorables" because we lack the capacity to select other words, whereas Herr Trump uses "loser" indiscriminately to refer to Democrats, judges, celebrities and terrorists.



Personally, I prefer the term "idiot racist fuckheads" to describe his idiot racist fuckhead supporters, but I find that this phrase upsets some of his idiot racist fuckhead supporters, so I use it sparingly when I'm in the presence of his idiot racist fuckhead supporters.

[RadiationTherapy]

6. Well, I find it to be the same. It is using a lightweight term to describe terrible ideologies.

Furthermore, like those who rally together as "Nasty Women," the term "Deplorable" has served to galvanize groups and they seem proud of the label. Furthermore, persistent use of labels to describe groups tends to result in dehumanization of all involved which can lead to horrific violence, etc. (Alfred Korzybski - Science and Sanity), and so I prefer more specific criticisms of behaviors. Furthermore, I think labels imply permanence about the undesirable behaviors, which I also find unhelpful, i.e. "that child is spoiled" has an implication of permanence when, indeed, a child may grow out of that phase.

[Orrex]

7. Now, that's a good point

That's why I endorse "idiot racist fuckheads" as my term of choice; they're less likely to self-identify as such at their rallies.

I regret that I have had countless discussions with current (and, at the time, future) Trump supporters over the years, and I have only ever seen a handful truly change their attitude--and in those cases it was due to some world-shattering personal experience, rather than by reasoned discussion. As for the few who now claim to regret their votes, I'm strongly confident that the great majority will still vote Republican in 2018 and 2020.

To that end, I will accept that "idiot racist fuckhead" is an unfairly permanent label when they give me reason to hope that it isn't permanently applicable.

[RadiationTherapy]

8. Oh, yes, I agree. I think it is nearly impossible to change ideologies without therapy

and hallucinogenics (Leary et al). LSD is a well-known "world-shatterer," but even then, I am not too sure.

I think Korzybski recognized we have to use labels sometimes for some things and was really just warning us that labels are complex and not merely convenient. For me, I have to persist with criticizing behaviors and ideologies as separate from the individual or group enacting them, but that is a personal quest. I am a firm believer that violence treads where communication fails, and I am - as far as I can tell - a firm pacifist.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

2. He speaks like a 12 year old. It's utterly embarrassing. I'm sure his NATO visit will produce more.

[dalton99a]

4. His NATO visit will also be amazing

[whistler162]

3. If you think that then you are a.....

big fat poopie head!