This question is one of the toughest to call and one of the most fun to forecast. There are lots of political considerations and a very short time frame. I am downgrading this one (I may end up regretting it but at least this question has been entertaining).
My starting point is that any legislation that gets signed will include a repeal of the individual mandate. This is something that all republicans and Trump can agree on. So the question becomes will any legislation be signed?
Trump and Ryan need to get this done in the 100 day time period. Trump desperately needs to be seen as keeping his promises and Ryan needs to show is effectiveness as a leader. Countering this is the desperate need of Republican Congress members to get reelected in 2018 or 2020 and the present bill includes outstanding ammunition for the democrats to use against them.
If negotiations lead to a bill that satisfies the more conservative members then it will surely include provisions that would put any republican legislator in a swing state or district in a precarious position. If negotiations lead to a bill that helps those in the swing states then it will lead to a right wing media blitz and put some conservative republicans at risk of a well-funded primary challenge.
Repealing without replacement could be done but that has the same problems for any Republican up for re-election.
Doing nothing right away will hurt Trump and Ryan but they can try and blame it on the Democrats and that is what I am forecasting. Reelection will become the most important issue in this debate.
re: "Reelection will become the most important issue in this debate"
Well said and well argued!
However, I disagree with your statement: "Trump and Ryan need to get this done in the 100 day time period".
Because re-election is the most important issue, getting this right will be more important than getting it done fast.
Consider these thoughts:
-Trump can claim he kept his promise by getting a bill to Congress well within the first 100 days
-UNTIL there is a vote, promises can be made and positions waffled on. I think it works for the benefit of all in Congress to delay a vote until after the mid-term election. Republicans can have their cake and eat it, too, shifting blame on to "obstructionist" Democrats, and Democrats can look tough by voting against every unpopular/expensive aspect of any proposal.
Thanks for your analysis, if you are right then it is even more reason to downgrade this question.
I heard Bohener say (indirectly addressing his former GOP), wherever you do, it will have you name on it!
Something to think about
Yes, owning health care is a bad place to be for any political party in this country. I wonder if the Democrats best strategy is to spell out clearly the flaws of the Republican plan but not get in the way of their taking a vote. Force them to own it may be their best strategy.
This is a very well reasoned input. I am leaning this way too for the reasons you state.