He’s a loser. She’s a loser. They’re all losers. Even countries are losers, I think, according to him. Policies are losers, too. I’m pretty sure he’s even called kids losers at some point.
And who the hell knows what else he’s labeled as a “loser” behind closed doors.
Since we can’t change the human leading our country at the moment, I thought I’d let this guy know (because he obviously must read what I write, duh) that he has some options when it comes to the insults he uses.
They’re pretty much mostly falling on deaf ears at this point, anyway. At least I hope. So it may be a moot point. But all I can think of when reports come out of him calling yet another person/thing/country/policy a “loser,” is Kelly Preston’s character in Jerry Maguire – the moment she insists he’s a loser for fouling up the Cush deal. Her emphasis – it sounds just like him.
As someone who loves language, and practices my fair share of profanity, I always thought it was unfair to label people with foul mouths as folks who don’t take the time to select better words. They’re lazy, is what people say. But I would like to argue that I have delighted in fits of tear-inducing laughter at some of the most creatively-foul descriptions I’ve heard people offer over the years.
Mostly when I worked in restaurants and, like, now – this point in my life, where me and my friends have reached an age of not caring about social graces every single second of the day.
But using the same word over and over? That’s so lame. So boring. It signals a lack of creativity and motivation for something more colorful, and to me, it signals an automatic, almost reptilian defense mechanism.
So I’m seriously hoping the Bully in Chief adds to his linguistic toolbox soon. I’m not sure I’ll pay attention more. I probably won’t. It would just be nice if he could not ruin another word.
He already ruined “trump.” I don’t feel like I can use it as I used to. I actually cringe when I go to type it, and then quickly backspace over it, knowing it doesn’t hold the same weight as it used to for me.
So, for the sake of the word “loser,” which basically means someone or something that has lost something, I’m hoping the person holding the highest elected office can mix it up a bit on his next, overly-defensive, narcissistic, ego-saving tirade.
Because the English language is full of opportunities to swap out his favorite five-letter, go-to snub – options that might even make him sound smarter and less of a child who was just verbally assailed with a level of intellectual wit he just couldn’t ever match.
Like, deadbeat. It’s not a bad option. It means the same thing as “loser,” for his purposes, which is to say it’s a solid insult. Or “also-ran,” according to the thesaurus, which apparently likes to suggest mildly obscure references. I’ll admit that’s a weak one, but it’s still on the table.
Or, how about “dud?”
That’s a fun one. Makes me think of a pop-it that doesn’t pop. Total dud. A dud is a total loser, for sure.
Flunkee works, too. “Has-been” is pretty descriptive, especially in politics and especially among a crowd that craves relevance. So is leech, absolute disgrace, last-place-finisher, wannabe, hater, flop.
I’d rather not understand how these types of people operate, why they do the things they do and how they actually get through life. I’m glad I don’t understand it. I just know they show the world who they are every day, and they think they’re smarter than the next guy.
They’re not. And it shows every time they open their good-for-nothing mouths.