The US House was able to pass a continuing resolution in a party-line vote Tuesday to set up another government funding fight in six months and avoid a government shutdown.

Whether or not Congress can avoid a shutdown still remains to be seen as the CR faces an uncertain fate in the US Senate.

The vote in the House was 217-213. Every Democrat voted against the CR except moderate US Rep. Jared Golden (ME-2), and every Republican voted for it except for one:

The congressman dubbed 'Mr. No' in Congress, Thomas Massie. The nickname was given to him by Politico not long after he took office in 2012 because he voted 'No' on so many bills.

It is likely a reference to former US Representative Dr. Ron Paul, whose contrarian approach to legislating earned him the nickname, “Dr. No.” 

Massie, who represents Kentucky's 4th Congressional District, has followed in Paul's footsteps, especially on matters of fiscal policy. He opposed a bipartisan CR to avoid a government shutdown back in December as well.

"Unless I get a lobotomy Monday that causes me to forget what I’ve witnessed the past 12 years, I’ll be a NO on the CR this week," Massie said on X ahead of the vote. "It amazes me that my colleagues and many of the public fall for the lie that we will fight another day."

It doesn't matter if it is a Democrat or Republican in the White House, Massie has consistently voted 'no' on increased spending and deficit expansions. He criticized the proposed CR for being "generally the same things Biden spent money on in his last 15 months in office."

His hardline stance has drawn the ire of Republican leaders when they have had control of Congress and/or the White House, and now President Donald Trump wants him primaried.

"HE SHOULD BE PRIMARIED," he typed in all caps on Truth Social, "and I will lead the charge against him." He also claimed that Massie has always voted for CRs.

Massie responded to the threat, saying "someone thinks they can control my voting card by threatening my re-election. Guess what? Doesn’t work on me."

And while the threat of being primaried tends to intimidate many members of Congress to the point of compliance or to a decision to resign, Massie has yet to fold under such threats. In fact, this isn't the first time Trump has targeted Massie.

In March 2020, he said the congressman should be kicked out of the Republican Party after Massie forced an in-person vote on COVID-19 relief. Yet, Massie remains in Congress.

He received 75.2% of the vote in the 2022 primary election in his district. He received 70% of the primary vote in 2024.

The reason the primary threat is so significant and is increasingly being used as a tool to keep party members in line is because research into election results shows that 90% of congressional districts are safe for one party or the other. 

This means the outcome of most elections is known months before Election Day.

It also means the winner of congressional elections – in most cases – is decided in a low-turnout party primary, giving party leaders and special interests that can mobilize voters outside influence on results.

The party primary has become a weapon used to keep members of both major parties in line Angering the higher-ups could mean a party endorsement of a primary opponent and millions poured into a district to unseat a “grandstander.”

And while Massie knows he isn’t immune to the primary threat (Kentucky uses closed partisan primaries), he also knows threatening one member can scare others into compliance. According to Politico:

“After the spending bill passed Tuesday evening, Massie said it ‘feels just like’ the day he opposed the pandemic bill and suggested that ‘the missives directed at me weren’t to get me to change my vote — I never change my vote.

“‘I think they were to try and keep the other Republicans in line until they get this over to the Senate,’ he added.”

And while there were a handful of Republican budget hawks who opposed the CR back in December, Massie was the only Republican who voted against the six-month funding extension on Tuesday. So it’s possible Massie is right. 

All a party needs to do under the current system is bring up the consequence of defiance and its leaders can get their members to vote for things those members may not actually support, but could otherwise end their political careers.