I wonder why ...?

[Kweli4Real]

I would love for some “polling”/”survey” organization to attempt to get to the root of why republicans and republican-leaning independent believe what they believe on the issues. I think that would be VERY revealing.

I would love to see the results of polling where, issue by issue, their fallacious arguments are deconstructed and provide them with evidence supporting the deconstruction.

Example: You support republican candidates because they support reducing the deficit. Would your support change if you were given non-partisan evidence that under the Obama Administration the deficit has been reduced?

Example: You support republican candidates because they oppose the individual mandate contained in “Obamacare.” Would your support waver if you were given non-partisan evidence that forced purchases are nothing new? We all are required to buy motorist liability insurance. While it is true that you only have to buy this insurance if you plan to drive, what is the penalty if you are caught driving without insurance? Now apply this to the individual mandate, would you be “okay” with being subjected to the criminal process should you visit a doctor or a hospital without having healthcare insurance? How is this any different?

Example: You support republican candidates because they opposed the TARP and the Stimulus Programs. Would your support waver if you were given non-partisan evidence that the TARP Program has actually made the treasury money? Would your support waver if you were provided non-partisan evidence that the Stimulus funds built/funded (pick a project)?

Example: You support republican candidates because they oppose tax increases. Would your support waver if you were given non-partisan evidence that the Obama Administration has lowered your taxes?

Each objection can be exploded in a similar manner, but no one is asking why republicans and republican-leaning independents are holding on to clearly false “facts.” If researchers were to drill down far enough, we would find one of two things occur; either the objectors would change their support, or they would ignore the evidence present and hold to their support … meaning that their objections are based on something other than their asserted facts.

And I think we all know what’s at the root of their objects.