Well, now you seem to be getting the dilemma.

I would bet a good majority of these folks are trump supporters.

Will there be greater subsidies? Or, will it be credits? Can they afford to cover the year until they file their returns for the credits? How much higher will the deductibles be? Will the coverage over insure them (e.g. for birth control pills, fertility treatment)? Will preventative checkups be dropped from the plans?

The other aspect is if they’d even qualify for insurance if “pre-existing conditions” were allowed as a reason to refuse insurance (as time goes by, age effectively becomes the pre-existing condition). It might not be explicit, but it might be in the pricing to push folks into the high risk pools.

At the confluence of politics and economics, solutions get rather complicated.

At best, this was the makings of a political firestorm for the GOP.

Yes, AHCA does increase the cost of health insurance for those over 55, but shouldn’t the folks that use the majority of health care pay more?

No doubt the senate will increase the subsidies for older folks.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/14/we-have-to-earn-42000-every-year-just-to-fill-in-for-our-obamacare-and-gop-plans-wont-help/

A patched obamacare lite was never going to cut it.

When people shift ALL the blame elsewhere for the AHCA failure, then they are missing what is trump’s contribution. It cannot be “nothing”. Yet, that is the argument.
.

As a reminder, this is what I said after the AHCA debacle…

“Does it mean trump or the GOP’s agenda for this term is dead?

This recent legislative failure, and obamacare ticking time bomb, leaves the door open to do something “bold”, if the GOP and trump care to handle it with more care.”
http://neoneocon.com/2017/03/24/no-vote-on-health-care-reform/#comment-2188634

So, yes, it is a “10 round fight”.
.

trump may have a great cabinet, but it remains to be seen if they function cohesively and if trump actually follows their advice, or if trump remains trump and just plays them against each other and just reacts to world events (vs have a philosophy that provides direction and a guidance).

bunion playing a smaller role has got to be a help in this respect.

Hey Eyeore! It’s not all bad. It’s not even a failure. It’s just the first round of a 10 round fight.

As to not being responsive to his voters, yes the Syrian bombing made me nervous, but in total Trump has worked to keep his campaign promises. I rate him a nine at this point.

Someone in another thread wondered if he even had a strategy in foreign policy or whether everything in the last few weeks was tactical.

Remember, “No battle plan survives contact with the enemy”. So in a sense all foreign policy is tactical, but how the events of the last few weeks seem to be a grand strategy– in its effect, feels almost too perfect to have been planned. To some extent that’s probably true. But Trump, like all president’s, receives advice from experts and hopefully makes the best decision from options.

Everyone seems to recognize Trump has selected very competent advisors (Bannon aside, and I’m not willing to concede at this point that he isn’t a good advisor in certain areas– after all he was instrumental in getting Trump elected) and they seem to be offering good options that cross conflicts and connect to a create a strategy.

And Trump seems to be making good policy choices from the options. Does this mean he’s softening his approach to China? Yes– but if the tradeoff is to contain North Korea in a way that the previous three presidents have been unable to do, that is a policy success. Of course, we don’t know the details of any “deal”, or if there even is a “deal”, but if there is and NK is contained, then Trump is a pretty good deal maker.

But trump is, as you rightly point out, evidently “beholding to no one”, even his voters, I’m afraid (or maybe that is a good thing – depends).

I certainly don’t want a POTUS who doesn’t proclaim love for their country. That does not make a POTUS, nor his actions, good for America, well intentions and all.

Wish neither clinton nor trump were names associated with the Presidency, but here we are.

I want trump to be a successful POTUS, after all, I, my family, friends, colleagues and partners, and community all will have to live with what he does.

HOWEVER, what he and I think are a “success” are probably very different things.

Forgive her Lord for she knows not the full implications of what she speaks.

The logic of your statement is that “No One” includes his voters, you understand.

And, this seems to be the case, as many hard core supporters express concerns, now.
.

“the guy loves America”

As they say “the road to h*ll is paved with good intentions”.

If that is all it took to be POTUS, there’d be plenty of dems who’d qualify too.
.

You are right, though. trump has fulfilled his one big promise that many justified their votes on…

On Nov 8, he wasn’t clinton.

Single payer it is then!

Foolish to put the focus merely and entirely on the “Win!!!” than on the substance.
.

trump DIDN’T do everything he could – that is precisely the point, and is the subject of the short list I gave.

Putting it all at Ryan’s feet is a cop out.

That is not leadership. Period.
.

trump is the one who campaigned on his competency.

trump is the one who staked his reputation on being a great deal maker.

Clearly, he proves neither in this case.
.

trump owns the failure, as much or more than Ryan.

You may not want to accept that, but outside of hard core trump fans, it is very much the reality.