Nothing’s wrong with me, your statement implied currently. He is not currently in congress and that contest took place in 2015. Use clearer language if you don’t want people to correct you.
He still is the best shot in congress. Even if he isn’t current in Congress, he can still presently be the current best shot of any current or former Congress person.
Words have meaning, you can’t be the best IN something if you’re not IN it, and have all current congress members been tested against him? If not you can’t make that claim. “Was” is correct and I’m not even positive on that because the only source I can find about this is a WSJ blurb that says the contest was “among democrats”. So if that’s the case what you should have said was “Tim Walz WAS the best shot amongst democrats in 2015”. You wouldn’t say Muhammad Ali IS the world heavyweight champion.
It’s a stupid thing to care about anyway because he’s adamantly pro gun control now. You’re not going to win over any gun people with this narrative of yours. There are plenty of better things about him to focus on.
There’s a difference between common sense gun control and not allowing people to hunt using appropriate guns for that task, though I acknowledge most gun nuts fail to realize that.
I know that. I’m in favor of it, but touting him as “the best shot in congress” is not going to help get support from anyone that would be impressed by that because as soon as they look into him at all they’re going to realize he’s not on their side. Better not to draw attention to his stance at all. There’s nothing to be gained from it. Everyone that cares about gun control is already going to vote for Kamala.
Because the right has co-opted the camo look as well as hunting. Tim Walz
iswas literally the best shot in congress.Edit: clarity for past and present so people don’t misunderstand
Tim Walz is a governor…
Who was in Congress when the shooting contest I’m talking about happened.
What’s wrong with you? Do you think he just fell out of the coconut tree? He exists in the context of all that came before his current position.
Nothing’s wrong with me, your statement implied currently. He is not currently in congress and that contest took place in 2015. Use clearer language if you don’t want people to correct you.
He still is the best shot in congress. Even if he isn’t current in Congress, he can still presently be the current best shot of any current or former Congress person.
Pedantry sure is fun.
Words have meaning, you can’t be the best IN something if you’re not IN it, and have all current congress members been tested against him? If not you can’t make that claim. “Was” is correct and I’m not even positive on that because the only source I can find about this is a WSJ blurb that says the contest was “among democrats”. So if that’s the case what you should have said was “Tim Walz WAS the best shot amongst democrats in 2015”. You wouldn’t say Muhammad Ali IS the world heavyweight champion.
It’s a stupid thing to care about anyway because he’s adamantly pro gun control now. You’re not going to win over any gun people with this narrative of yours. There are plenty of better things about him to focus on.
There’s a difference between common sense gun control and not allowing people to hunt using appropriate guns for that task, though I acknowledge most gun nuts fail to realize that.
I know that. I’m in favor of it, but touting him as “the best shot in congress” is not going to help get support from anyone that would be impressed by that because as soon as they look into him at all they’re going to realize he’s not on their side. Better not to draw attention to his stance at all. There’s nothing to be gained from it. Everyone that cares about gun control is already going to vote for Kamala.
Hello
Hobby shooting and sport shooting are not republican activities. They have no political affiliation. Hope this helps!
You’re just being pedantic
Lemmy’s favorite pastime.
Sorry for trying to help people not make blatantly false statements I guess…
You really do not sound sorry. You should go back and edit that for clarity so people don’t get confused and think you were being sincere.
Do you know what the word blatantly means?
Do you think it correctly applies in this context? Sorry, I’m just trying to help.
in a completely obvious and unsubtle way.
Lmao this is what a child’s tantrum looks like in 2024.
Covfefe