Tag: vote
Thom Tillis

After Trump Attacks, North Carolina's Sen. Tillis Says He'll Quit

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who had been poised for a highly competitive 2026 Senate race, announced Sunday that he will not run again.

His decision came shortly after he cast a “no” vote on a procedural motion tied to President Donald Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” Saturday. Following Tillis' vote, Trump launched a series of attacks against him via social media, threatening to back primary challenge against the North Carolina senator for opposing his domestic bill.

In a statement released Sunday afternoon, Tillis said, “In Washington over the last few years, it’s become increasingly evident that leaders who are willing to embrace bipartisanship, compromise, and demonstrate independent thinking are becoming an endangered species.”

He continued: "As many of my colleagues have noticed over the last year, and at times even joked about, I haven’t exactly been excited about running for another term. That is true since the choice is between spending another six years navigating the political theatre and partisan gridlock in Washington or spending that time with the love of my life Susan, our two children, three beautiful grandchildren, and the rest of our extended family back home. It’s not a hard choice, and I will not be seeking re‑election.”

Tillis' announcement led to strong reactions on social media.

Political commentator Sarah Longwell wrote on the social platform X: "Would be cool if instead of unconditional surrender these guys would use their power to beat back the forces that have so degraded the institutions they took an oath to protect."

Analyst Michael Baharaeen, reacting to the news, said: "Whoa. Well, there's one crucial building block in the Dems' uphill battle to winning back the Senate. This and ME are likely to be among the party's best pick-up opportunities of the cycle."

Journalist Vince Coglianese wrote: "Right after Trump announces that he’s searching for a Thom Tillis replacement, Tillis throws in the towel. He’s retiring."

Democratic strategist David Bergstein wrote: "The work that is being done by so many to shine a spotlight on how bad this bill is has created an unescapable political vice for the most vulnerable GOP Senator."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Margie Whines That Her Life In Congress Is 'Miserable' -- And Costs Too Much

Mad Margie Is Sorry She Voted For Trump's Budget Bill

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, previously celebrated the House's passage of President Donald Trump's "One Big, Beautiful Bill.” But now she claims that she would have voted against it—had she actually read it.

In a post on X, Greene explained that she didn’t know that the bill includes a provision blocking states from regulating artificial intelligence, and had she known, she would have voted against the Medicaid-slashing legislation that passed by a one-vote margin.

"Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there,” she wrote.

Greene had been championing the dogshit legislation that slashes health care and food stamps while exploding the deficit with tax cuts for the rich. And after it passed the House ahead of Memorial Day, she cheered.

"We passed President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill out of the House this morning and now it’s on its way to the Senate!!" Greene wrote on X, celebrating the fact that the legislation would block Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood.

But now she claims that she didn't read the full bill, the text of which was released late at night and just a few hours before the House voted on it.

But Greene isn't the only Republican to admit to having no idea what she voted for.

Rep. Mike Flood of Nebraska said he didn't know that the bill includes a provision that would make it more difficult for federal judges to enforce contempt rulings—a last-minute addition from sycophantic lawmakers who want to protect Dear Leader from being held accountable for ignoring court orders.

“This provision was unknown to me when I voted for the bill,” Flood said during a town hall, where he was mercilessly booed by his constituents who were angry that he voted in favor of the bill.

As backlash mounts against the bill, it’s possible that we’ll see other GOP lawmakers express remorse for voting in support of legislation that will kick millions of people off of their health insurance and food assistance while potentially taking down the U.S. economy.

It seems that even Republicans understand how much of a political loser the bill is, as GOP lawmakers are straight up lying about its Medicaid cuts to try to avoid voter backlash, which has exploded at town halls across the country.

The White House even released a fact sheet assuring Americans that people won’t “literally die” because of the bill.

If you have to explain to people that you don’t think they’ll die from your signature legislation’s health care cuts, it’s safe to say that you’re not in a great place politically.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

How Six Republicans In Congress Will Profit From Broken Medicaid Promise

How Six Republicans In Congress Will Profit From Broken Medicaid Promise

Just five weeks after pledging that they would not support the Republican Party's budget reconciliation package if it included cuts to Medicaid, six GOP lawmakers ultimately did just that on Thursday morning—and an analysis by government watchdog Accountable. US suggested they voted for the legislation to benefit themselves, despite the suffering it would cause for their constituents.

Along with cutting Medicaid for close to 14 million Americans and slashing nearly $300 billion in food assistance, the bill Republicans voted on in the early morning hours after weeks of deliberation included a tax policy proposal to expand a provision called Section 199A, which was previously introduced during the first Trump administration as part of the GOP's original law providing tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy.

The bill that passed in the House Thursday would raise the percentage of qualifying business income—such as rental income—people can deduct from their taxes from 20% to 23%. The provision is now set to expire at the end of the year.

If it's extended as written in the reconciliation bill, Accountable.US identified six Republican House members who could directly benefit from the expansion of the "pass-through deduction": Reps. Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania, Rob Wittman of Virginia, Jen Kiggans of Virginia, Young Kim of California, Juan Ciscomani of Arizona, and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey.

Those six lawmakers were among the 12 who last month wrote to GOP leaders to say they represent "districts with high rates of constituents who depend on Medicaid" and to "reiterate our strong support for this program that ensures our constituents have reliable healthcare."

"We cannot and will not support a final reconciliation bill that includes any reduction in Medicaid coverage for vulnerable populations," wrote the lawmakers last month. "Cuts to Medicaid also threaten the viability of hospitals, nursing homes, and safety-net providers, nationwide. Many hospitals—particularly in rural and underserved areas—rely heavily on Medicaid funding, with some receiving over half their revenue from the program alone."

"It is the peak of hypocrisy that the loudest and most vocal opponents of Medicaid cuts cowered in a matter of days in favor of a bill that will make the largest cuts to Medicaid in modern history—all to pay for lower taxes for the richest."

With the six Republican members poised to earn thousands more each year from the pass-through income deduction, those concerns appeared to have evaporated on Thursday.

"It is the peak of hypocrisy that the loudest and most vocal opponents of Medicaid cuts cowered in a matter of days in favor of a bill that will make the largest cuts to Medicaid in modern history—all to pay for lower taxes for the richest," said Tony Carrk, executive director of Accountable.US. "Even worse, those very members stand to financially gain from those tax cuts, while their own constituents lose their healthcare. Their votes aren't just a flip-flop; they are a betrayal to hardworking Americans everywhere who will be worse off because of this bill."

Accountable's Cash in Congress project found that for the 2023 tax filing year, the six members of Congress earned a combined $327,000 in pass-through income, according to financial disclosures.

Bresnahan stands to benefit the most from the extension of Section 199A, The American Prospectreported, as he earned at least $137,000 from rental properties. Out of the six lawmakers, he also represents the most Medicaid beneficiaries: 230,000.

Wittman reported $105,000 or more in pass-through rental income, and represents 125,000 people who receive Medicaid. Kiggans reported $50,000 and represents 130,000 people who use the healthcare program for low-income Americans.

All together, reported The American Prospect, the lawmakers represent 971,000 Medicaid beneficiaries who could be affected by a work requirement amendment that would go into effect at the end of 2026 and other provisions.

"Millions of Americans will see their healthcare, food, and education costs skyrocket, all so House Republicans can hand themselves and their wealthiest donors a huge tax break," said Accountable. "The only 'winners' in this bill are the billionaires that paid for it."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

WATCH: Trump Nominee Says It's 'Very Based' To Think Women Shouldn't Vote

WATCH: Trump Nominee Says It's 'Very Based' To Think Women Shouldn't Vote

On May 29, President Donald Trump “nominated Paul Ingrassia, a former far-right podcast host now serving as the White House liaison to the Department of Homeland Security, to a new important role: head of the Office of Special Counsel, an independent corruption-fighting agency that safeguards federal whistle-blowers and enforces some ethics laws,” as reported by The New York Times.

ALAN JACOBY (HOST): I don't want a woman as a vice president. My wife – I am married to the biggest misogynist this side of the Mississippi, by the way.

My wife literally thinks women should not vote. I tend to agree with her a lot –

PAUL INGRASSIA (GUEST): She’s very based.

JACOBY: Unless of course you’re voting for Donald Trump.

And Nikki Haley, forget about it. Forget Nikki Haley birdbrain, warmonger. It's – There's no way. I'd have to agree with Tucker Carlson. I'd have a hard time if that was the VP choice because she'll be just eyeing for 2028 or whatever the case is if they could somehow take Trump out, and I just I could not, I couldn't see it.

INGRASSIA: She's so terrible. She's so incompetent. I mean, it's amazing that she even had that position as ambassador to the United Nations. I mean, I can't believe this woman made it so far in her professional political career given how dumb she just sounds on the campaign trail. And the fact that she is so, I mean, she's pretty decently financially supported. I mean, you really just question the sanity of the people who are behind her. I mean, this woman sounds like a child.

She shouldn't even, you know, she shouldn't, she should be stripped of all of her titles. She should be deported if you were to ask me, you know, to tell you the truth, even though I realize she's — I guess she was born here.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World