If you accept the premise that everyone should have basic healthcare, providing that boils down to how to finance the entitlement. I am surprised that I have not seen the financing point made by policy experts or by the media (maybe I am not looking hard enough).
However the argument between Republicans and Democrats was not about financing healthcare. The two parties have different objectives: provide for universal healthcare versus reducing taxes and giving tax breaks to higher income groups.
The Trump / Republican’s repeal and replace is a smokescreen to create something federal-budget cheap that looks like universal healthcare. The problem is all of the plans to date would leave millions uninsured. If the debate had been framed as contrasting objectives, healthcare versus tax breaks, the reason for the gridlock would have been obvious and the debate would have been, at least, honest.
In any case Krugman has nice piece on alternatives for providing universal coverage, single payer versus alternatives to single payer: What’s Next for Progressives? In this article, Krugman also discusses the need to “focus on other holes in the U.S. safety net.”