- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Special Ed Gallrein straight up lying
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:45 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:45 pm to Indefatigable
quote:No way dude. Trump's entire agenda has been stopped by the impotent Thomas Massie.
It won’t make Congress, the House, or the Senate more likely to pass President Trump’s agenda.
1
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:46 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Massie did vote against a procedural “rule” vote (the mechanism that brings a bill to the floor for debate and final vote). On one of those rule votes, he was the only Republican to vote no.
This is true and factual.
Massie was the 1 “Republican” to vote No on advancing the Save Act to the House floor for a vote. It advanced by 1 vote, despite Massie’s No.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:48 pm to jrodLSUke
Yeah, this should be RA’d as it’s just false, Massie did vote to not advance it
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:49 pm to CamdenTiger
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:50 pm to CamdenTiger
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:51 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
quote:
It won’t make Congress, the House, or the Senate more likely to pass President Trump’s agenda.
No way dude. Trump's entire agenda has been stopped by the impotent Thomas Massie.
Can't wait for ad hominem attacks next time a bill doesn't pass.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:52 pm to Cuz413
You can sky scream all you want. He voted against advancing it.
Thats a no vote. Period. Him not stopping it was due to him not getting one more gop member to vote against it with him.
Once it passed, yes... he voted for it because that vote is very public.
Thats a no vote. Period. Him not stopping it was due to him not getting one more gop member to vote against it with him.
Once it passed, yes... he voted for it because that vote is very public.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:52 pm to jrodLSUke
quote:
This is true and factual.
Massie was the 1 “Republican” to vote No on advancing the Save Act to the House floor for a vote. It advanced by 1 vote, despite Massie’s No.
Did he explain this vote?
One of the things Massie is accused of is voting with Republicans when it's clear a bill will pass one way or another.
Does he have sound reasoning? Or, is this a case where he was trying to kill it when it was close...but voted for it when the writing was on the wall?
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:54 pm to jrodLSUke
quote:
Massie was the 1 “Republican” to vote No on advancing the Save Act to the House floor for a vote. It advanced by 1 vote, despite Massie’s No.
You may have heard; Mr Massie votes strictly according to PRINCIPLE. Just like when he was the only CongressPerson to vote NO on whether Israel has a right to exist. The final tally was 411-1, but Thomas stood up for his PRINCIPLEs.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:55 pm to moneyg
Im sure he had to give a reason. Most likely it was his usual. "I didn't like this attached ". So rather than fight on the floor to stop the part he did not like, he tried to kill the whole act.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:57 pm to Cuz413
That was the final bill, he voted not to advance it, so Gallrein is right that he voted against it, even though he reversed himself on the final vote. It still makes what Gallerein says accurate, and not a lie, so probably need to change the OP
Posted on 5/19/26 at 4:59 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Massie did vote against a procedural “rule” vote (the mechanism that brings a bill to the floor for debate and final vote). On one of those rule votes, he was the only Republican to vote no. So he tried to block it.
He didn’t try to block it, you lying piece of shite.
He voted against a procedural rule change that allowed spending bills to come to the floor without a 24-hour notice.
He voted for the SAVE Act.
You’re one stupid motherfricker.
This post was edited on 5/19/26 at 5:05 pm
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:00 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Im sure he had to give a reason. Most likely it was his usual. "I didn't like this attached ". So rather than fight on the floor to stop the part he did not like, he tried to kill the whole act.
That's his act. He finds some piddling reason to side with the left and turns it into a matter of PRINCIPLE. There have been times when it was just Thomas and the squad who shared his principles.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:01 pm to CamdenTiger
quote:
It still makes what Gallerein says accurate, and not a lie, so probably need to change the OP
No. No, it doesn’t. Ed’s a fricking liar.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:02 pm to Chancellor
quote:
He didn’t try to block it, you lying piece of shite. He voted against a procedural rule that allowed spending bills to come to the floor without a 24-hour notice. He vote for the SAVE Act. You’re one stupid motherfricker.
You're doing it wrong. You're supposed to say, "Yes he voted to block it, but it was a matter of PRINCIPLE.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:03 pm to Chancellor
quote:
No. No, it doesn’t. Ed’s a fricking liar.
Maybe, but not on this, looks like he was accurate, here
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:03 pm to CamdenTiger
Sure, Boomer.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:04 pm to Chancellor
You sound like a sky screamer.
That procedural vote was not just against that. It was against the whole thing because he did not like 1 thing in it that he could have fought against if something was pushed.
Thats not even debatable. That is what he did. Period.
That procedural vote was not just against that. It was against the whole thing because he did not like 1 thing in it that he could have fought against if something was pushed.
Thats not even debatable. That is what he did. Period.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 5:25 pm to wdhalgren
quote:Or like when he voted to release the names of lawmakers who used taxpayer funds to settle sexual harassment claims.(H. Res. 1100)
Just like when he was the only CongressPerson to vote NO on whether Israel has a right to exist.
He was only one of 65 yea votes, so the measure did not advance.
Wanna know how many of your faves successfully voted to block this?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News