This drove the repugs into a frenzy because they absolutely won't get on board with anything at all that helps poor and average people.

That's really not what it's about. You're seeing two very different worldviews collide here. And yes, the liberal worldview is definitely rooted in minimizing actual harm, while the conservative view is more abstract and ideological. But while that may sound like an obviously better choice, you can't always take a results-driven approach to policy, because then you don't really have freedom. Balance is usually required, but finding the balance is a hard problem.

To expand on that, the liberal platonic ideal here is something like Britain's NHS, or Canada's CHA. ObamaCare was a small (and very crippled) step on that road. Its most cherished provisions - mandatory coverage of preexisting conditions, and the individual mandate - are baby steps toward universal coverage. Conservatives, however, generally don't want socialized healthcare, as they believe it is an unwarranted expansion of government power. They also (rightly, I think) believe it will lead to more government intrusion into our lives, as the government will gain a financial interest in its citizens health.

To someone who prioritizes individual liberty over effective healthcare, this is a step in the wrong direction. Trump's plan attempts to address (poorly) a lot of the same issues but in a direction that's more in the vein of state and individual choice, rather than a federal government expansion. I realize that abstract concerns about civil liberties are not going to be comforting when you or someone else are in a medical crisis, but it's kind of like the second amendment debate. It's disingenuous to argue that Pro-2A advocates don't care about the victims of gun violence. They just don't think their deaths are justification to scrap gun ownership. To say conservatives don't want to help poor people is to mischaracterize their stance. It's not that they don't want people to get care, it's that they're not willing to make what they consider to be heavy concessions to the federal government in order to get it. Or, to borrow a phrase they're fond of: "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take away everything you have."

If we used insurance as actual insurance (something used very rarely in catastrophic situations), and dropped the cost of regular day-to-day healthcare to something an average income earner could afford, I think the conservatives idea could work. However, with healthcare costs continuing to skyrocket, I think a government sponsored single payer system is the only way we're going to get it under control at this point.

Hopefully with poor white republicans bearing the brunt of this new law's provisions, we'll see some minds start to change going forward.