baloney.
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?
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...