It... polled awareness too. Awareness is low. Also I disagree that a "likely voter" is more likely to be sufficiently aware of the bill's contents. Plenty of "likely voters" listen to Rush Limbaugh and believe him when he says the bill is a SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER. They wont investigate beyond that.
63% of likely voters don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. And awareness may be low, but only about as low as voter turnout. The voters that turn out are almost definitely more informed on the issue than people who don't vote are - that's just common sense. It makes sense that a lot of people not aware/interested in political news would be the ones who don't vote.
And why won't they investigate beyond that? The people whose minds might change on the issue would mostly be moderates. Do you honestly think that
moderates would use Rush Limbaugh as their sole source of information?
Yeah that's kinda the problem. Polling people who don't understand the bill isn't going to give you a meaningful answer.
Yes it does, because we live in a democracy, and what the people think matters no matter what you want.
And if you don't want to poll people who don't understand the bill, then Senators shouldn't have voted on it, because as I said (and you apparently agreed with this), nobody, even them, could understand it. Actually, did you even read my post?
And you ignored the point about the one-sentence blurb the study provided.
Yes. And that awareness is low. When explained, the support goes up. More awareness brings more support. Interesting don't you think?
That not only skips over one of my points, but blatantly mischaracterizes the study. Support does not go up when the bill is "explained" (in one-sentence blurbs). It is simply found that many of the provisions are more popular than the bill itself. The study did not measure any change in support after an "explanation".
So you think democracy doesn't work, period. Interesting.
When people are told a few hundred times "OBAMACARE = SOCIALIST RATIONING GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER" they start to hate it, despite not knowing a thing about it. They'll vote Republican to get rid of something they don't understand.
So you think that conservatives are the only ones who used hyperbole and mischaracterization in that debate. That's just plain not true. More importantly, if conservatives are so dumb that according to you, they just hear socialism and don't need to hear anything else (which is smug condescending BS, but never mind that), it doesn't matter, because they are conservatives and would likely oppose the bill anyways. Remember, the so-called popular provisions didn't have unanimous support; basically all of them had at least 40% opposed. There's your Limbaugh crowd for you, the people who
oppose not only the bill, but the provisions. The people who approve of many of the provisions, but not the bill itself, would have to be more moderate than that. Take Scott Brown - he approves of things like the public option, but is against the bill because of its cost. I suspect that many such people are the same. Keep in mind that it's probably only about 15%-ish that approve of most of the provisions, but not of the bill itself.
Anyways, if you hate democracy so much - as you just said you did (again I wonder if you were even reading my post) - maybe you should move to some place with less of it?
