Posted on 03/30/2017 1:13:04 PM PDT by Luircin
Then engage and offer me a counterpoint.
Because from the reports I saw, the HFC never had any intention of making a deal; they kept changing their demands and then when Trump thought he had a deal, it turns out that they changed their minds again.
I’m not making moral judgments on their tactics here, but those WERE their tactics and they never denied it when accused, least as far as I can see!
And they got what they wanted, but they also got the consequences for their decision to use those specific tactics, and if Trump is using TBF strategy, they should have expected it.
I’m trying to be neutral and analyze both Trump and the HFC; I’m not going to knee-jerk against either party or make claims of morality. Maybe blowing their wad in order to scuttle Ryancare in the manner they did was worth it, but it DID bring them into conflict with Trump and his tweets have been perfectly consistent with the TBF strategy.
You want to argue, feel free, but if you don’t have any arguments other than to just gainsay me, why post at all?
Lol... imagine an auto-correct that would switch ‘phallic’ victory for ‘pyhrric’ and nobody noticed.
baloney
The baloney is yours.
There are at least 3 sources who have indicated that the HFC did not negotiate in good faith, and one of those sources was a member of the caucus himself who has subsequently left the group.
Another source was the President of the United States, who said he learned something about "loyalty" as a result of his experience.
Yet another source is an FR member who has close connections in the White House, appears to be very well informed, and is no liar.
The term "moving the goal posts" thus seems apropos, and if that's what occurred, then it was a failure to act in good faith.
I remain optimistic that this impasse will be resolved before too long, and I certainly believe that patriots of good conscience can disagree over whether this legislation should have been passed or not...
Didn’t hear about the FR source. Which one and where?
“Trump is not a conservative.
Neither is Ryan, who was installed by the Freedom Caucus as Speaker.
Best thread I’ve read in ages.
The FR source is LS:
‘I got the impression that the House Freedom Caucus did NOT negotiate in good faith, that they kept moving the goal posts. They were given concessions, then came back for more.’
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3538421/posts?page=19#19
There is no counterpoint to a false and baseless accusation. It’s like trying to prove a negative. In my opinion the caucus examined a bill, falsly purported to be a repeal, to which they had no part in design, and found they could not support it. No negotiation ever took place because the bill never even approached being a repeal. It was a pig in poke. It was a no sale.
The RINOs and Trump campaigned in bad faith because they never intended to repeal Obamacare they just wanted to take it over.
So? That just shows how the HFC is committed to party unity. And look at how that good deed came back to kick them in the butt. They got sabotaged by Ryan.
Yes, he just needs some more legislative experience (or maybe this bill was enough- he’s a fast learner).
Once Ryan wrote the bill in secret without including conservatives in the process failure was pre-ordained.
The OP figures from his tweets that Trump hasn’t realized that yet.
We’ll see.
So in other words, you’ve got nothing to offer but to try to change the subject.
Sorry, but no matter your opinions on the Ryancare bill, it is STILL negotiating in bad faith to pretend to support a bill one day, only to suddenly call back with more demands out of the blue.
Do you have an answer to that?
I doubt it; if you did, you would have posted it already.
Sorry buddy, but the HFC is not as pure as the driven snow like you seem to want to believe. They got what they wanted, but they used underhanded tactics to do it. It’s up to you to decide whether it was worth it.
So your excuse is a baseless accusation of ‘They did it too! TRUMP BAD! TRUMP BAD!’
Doesn’t change negotiations in bad faith that the HFC did.
Knee-jerk defensiveness of your heroes does not a good argument make. You can argue that their tactics were worth it if you want, but you CANNOT change the truth.
And the funny thing is that I wasn’t even attacking the HFC for what they did; I simply pointed out the truth and then pointed out the response that the TBF strategy would have called for.
I’ll give you this, if they negotiated at all, they should not have because this baby (our free market) cannot be divided with the socialist’s Obamacare haircut. Maybe they should have started out with a load-and-clear counter proposal like Mo Brooks’ one sentence repeal or bust!
Perhaps they should have!
I don’t know; I’m not a mind-reader and I don’t know the stories of every person on the Hill. All I can do is look at the behaviors and analyze as best I can.
That was the impression he had after dealing with the Freedom Caucus who sat there in meetings telling him they "agree in principle with repeal and replace," and then brown nosing during subsequent meetings before returning with an ever expanding list of demands.
“They got sabotaged by Ryan.”
Yes. They believed a leopard can change his spots.
NeverTrumper Paul Ryan is sabotaging Trump.
Trump campaigned with a promise to repeal ACA. Ryan trots out a bill that amends ACA with a promise to repeal ACA with another bill in a year or two.
Ryan is a vicious snake.
You’re probably correct.
I’ll bet that Trump knows it too, and is playing along because he believes that it’s a step forward in his ultimate aim—at least his ultimate aim in regards to health care. But I’m willing to bet that he’s well aware that they’re preparing knives to try to stick in his back.
Playing Nice (in regards to game theory) does not necessarily mean being good, it just means cooperation and negotiation. It also doesn’t preclude future treachery. I believe that Trump is willing to use them for as long as they’re useful, but will drop upon them like a sledgehammer if they start playing silly buggers.
Helpful.
For me the question is whether the Leadership started the ‘nasty’ by excluding Freedom Caucus from writing the bill.
Or whether the Freedom Caucus started the ‘nasty’ by refusing to participate in it’s writing.
Whichever it is should change.
***
Could be both. The HFC and the establishment were dealing with each other as much as they were dealing with Trump. Three different factions. Four if you count the petulant Demobrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.