and his comings and goings and doings after that date will no longer be relevant to me or mine, but as the occasion arises I will be sure to use correct titles when titles are warranted.

When referring to an individual in writing or the third person, the title is generally appended with the modifier“former”. This is common practice by serious journalists and writers.

When addressing the person directly, the “former” is often omitted.

That has been the traditional etiquette and protocol for decades.

Of course, with the Big Lie of 2020, the MAGA crowd ignored this.

I have not read any history books or articles that refer to George Washington as former President Washington. Same for Lincoln and all the other presidents.

When Madeleine Albright was addressed in person in interviews after she was no longer Secretary of State, I recall her being called, Madam Secretary, or Secretary Albright, not former Secretary Albright.

People are free to use whatever titles they want, or no titles. I am only making suggestions.

What I wrote is correct, common, accepted practice.

When referring to someone (who is alive) in the third person, “former” is typically appended to their title.

While this wouldn’t risk confusion with the current president, imagine the problems ignoring this rule could create when writing about reporting on the hundreds/thousands of former representatives, senators and governors.

When addressing that person directly, such as in an interview or press conference, the “former” modifier is often dropped.

It is not “everyone is free to do what they want” when it comes to writing for publication- there are standards to be followed, that don’t apply to social media and Internet forums.

Last edited Sat Dec 21, 2024, 04:02 AM - Edit history (1)

In the OP, I was not referring to an official publication or broadcast, only to every day language or, in my case, to posts.

when referring to her.

So I should have worded the OP differently to say that my preference is to continue using the word "president" with Biden's name, regardless of protocols.

I am thinking of how Mr. Trump continued to use "president" instead of "former president" after he lost in 2020.

As for saying "Mr." Instead of president when referring to Trump, he's been called much worse by many of us on DU.

Biden while he is in office, I doubt that will change after 20 Jan. Even more so with Vice President Harris.

. . . do not use the title "President".

Instead, the following are suggestions to use when referring to Trump.

1. Just don't ever use his name. But if you must, try one of the following.
2. "That asshole Trump"
3. "Trump, the convicted felon"
4. "That piece of shit Trump"
5. "Putin's stooge Trump"

Feel free to add to this list.

I Iike using Mr. because it treats him as an ordinary person, which he can't tolerate. If Musk and other oligarchs or Putin are running the show, then Mr. is perhaps the most accurate title for him.

“Trump” (or “trump”) with all those negative adjectives works.

But among friends and others of like mind, it’d be various versions of “that fucking/fucker/fuckwad trump”. Anything with a negative connotation will work just fine, especially when it includes various versions of the f-word.

And I also enjoy NOT capitalizing the “t” in his last name.

Perhaps there is a person disserving of a name or honorific of some sort in there somewhere, but I'll keep him a non-entity number.

It almost never comes up because I only discuss politics with my family or a few friends here and there. Orange psycho is the exception.

intentionally rejected the titles of the British system.

They said they didn't want a king but the P and others do get special treatment... and look at where we are now because the president was given too much power and because of the electoral college etc. I have no problem with titles being part British, but I don't take it seriously.

It's not really egalitarian though, as money talks etc.