Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act? Which are you in favor of?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Obamacare or The Affordable Care Act? Which are you in favor of?

You have to see this to believe it. Unfortunately, the video does not embed, so you have to go to the article and scroll down.

Basically, Jimmy Kimmel sent out a crew to interview random people on the street to ask them which they preferred, Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act. Almost all of them said "The Affordable Care Act" and gave their reasons. See it here:

THIS MAY BE ONE OF JIMMY KIMMEL’S BEST PRANKS YET…AND IT INVOLVES OBAMACARE

TheBlaze

Obviously, this shows how uninformed and stupid people are about politics. Kimmel even told one of the ladies in his audience, “Welcome…welcome stupid people. You have a home here with me.”

But as a student of marketing and persuasion, I find one aspect creepy. Notice that most of the people interviewed spoke immediately with a posture of absolute certainty.

I attribute this to two things:

1. Multiple answer quizzes from school on up. People have simply learned the habit of limiting their thinking to the alternatives given to them by an authority.

2. Primates learn best by imitation. So what do they see in the mainstream media? Bickering where neither side in a clash of opposing views gets disgraced. (The vast majority of the time, that is.) They see people lying and faking it all over the place. Not only do these pundits and "experts" get away with this crap, they are rewarded for it. And all of them--regardless of how ridiculous they sound logically--speak immediately and with absolute certainty. They even flare up at each other. I wish there were something deeper to point to except a banal truth, but here is how it works in the mainstream: Issue an opinion with a posture of certainty and you get a reward. That's the entertainment and that's the covert message. Pavlov--ding, salivate.

So normal people learn to imitate the certainty they constantly observe. Granted, it's by osmosis and not consciously chosen. But on the conscious level, I believe they reinforce their adoption of it at those times when they don't know something it seems like a good tactic to not look stupid .

Fake it 'till you make it, baby.

I don't know how to reach people like that except by storytelling. Make them look foolish? Hell, that happens all the time. Look how far that's gone.

In order for reason to work, people have to pay attention enough to understand what you say. That's the minimum. If they don't hear your argument, if they don't know what it is, how on earth are they going to be persuaded by it? The sad truth is a good chunk of Americans pay zero attention to the arguments in important issues and only let mainstream attitudes seep in.

This is one of the reasons I'm so big on story right now. People like those interviewed live their entire lives in a storyline that was fed to them by accident of birth or circumstances and, outside of their day-to-day concerns, peg everything they observe in society to that.

In the meantime, have a good laugh. Kimmel's prank is funny.

Michael

[PDS]

This reminds me of the prank in the 2012 election by someone like Kimmel that asked people whether they planned to vote that day. The day of the prank was the day before the election. I was amazed that people simply brazenly lied about their intentions. "Yes, I plan to go vote in the next hour or so," etc. They were clearly willing to lie to conform to the implied expectation built into the question, i.e., surely you are a good citizen, so do you plan to vote today? For someone who picks juries on a fairly regular basis, this willingness to lie in response to questions by strangers put a pretty good shiver up my spine.

At least the people in the Kimmel prank above are merely bluffing by (merely?) claiming knowledge where they have none.

[caroljane]

Lying to strangers is usually just a social lubricant to spare the feelings of others/avoid negative reactions from them. How are you? Fine (my right foot is killing me and my boss is a sadist and my son broke curfew again...) Got any spare change? No, sorry, just my bus fare and I need it to get home which is 100 km away, ($20 in loonies in my pocket and that's not counting what's in my purse)

I wonder how this impulse compounded by the wish to appear knowledgeable and principled works out in the small group of a jury,

[syrakusos]

I agree Daunce. As amusing as these videos are, they are only edited to make a point. If they interviewed 1000 well informed and brilliant people, we still would just see the eight idiots.

This is nothing new. I had a great teacher for ninth grade civics. He told us of a man-on-the-street interview poll about "The Mann Act." No one said that they did not know what it was. That was 1963.

And BTW: Note that in his intro, Kimmel does remind the audience that the ACA is Obamacare. If it were obvious or common knowledge, he would not need to reinforce that. He did that as a manipulative gimmick so that his supporters would not feel as stupid as the people of whom he (for them) is making fun. This is just cheerleading.

[Darrell Hougen]

At first I heard the clip on the radio and I thought there were a bunch of dumb, uninformed people out there. Then, I saw the video and I realized something. Most of the people, taken off guard, apparently thought that the ACA was the Republican alternative. That's not surprising. Who can remember the names of all of the government programs? And, the format of the question leads a person to believe the ACA and Obamacare are two different things. It would be really easy to be taken by surprise and not be able to remember where the name came from in the span of a short interview.

This is one of the problems with gotcha questions. Michael M. pointed out some others, like the editing of the tape. But, even if we're considering interviewing a single, knowledgeable person, it is easy to make a person look dumb by asking unexpected questions and not giving the other person time to think about the answers. Under that kind of pressure, who has time to think?

That reminds me of something Rand said, though I don't have the exact quote handy; she said that philosophers (or reporters or whoever) act as though the fact that thinking proceeds by some process means that the act of thinking is invalid. Sorry that I don't recall the exact quote better. In a case like the above, the fact that a person can't remember what the Affordable Care Act is off the top of his head seems to mean he doesn't have a valid opinion or doesn't know what he is talking about, though, if you gave him ten minutes to think, he might do much better.

I began wondering what I would do in a situation like that. Of course, I know what the ACA is, because I've been following the news on it for years and it has been prominent in the news lately. I've also been deeply opposed to it from the beginning. However, I had to stop and think why I was opposed to it. If someone asked me without warning, would I be able to clearly articulate what I think the failings of the ACA are? If those answers aren't fresh in a person's mind, they are hard to come up with on the spur of the moment. Would I remember to mention the potential pitfalls of Accountable Care Organizations, etc.? You really have to be at the top of your game to clearly articulate your opinions on such subjects in such a situation.

Of course, if you can't think of the answer off the top of your head, you might be better off saying you need time to think or asking what the ACA is, etc., rather than jumping to conclusions and attempting to answer without having all of the facts fresh in your mind. But, learning to posture defensively is something that also takes practice. I don't think it comes naturally.

Darrell

[caroljane]

This whole silly mess is a pretty unattractive offshoot of American Exceptionalism. In other countries single-payer has worked over and over, despite the cherry-picked horror stories the insurance lobby have mustered. It has now become nothing but Obama the Usurper v Real Amuricans and I don't trust Dr. Allan, she doesn't shave her legs.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

People from countries where single payer has worked over and over keep coming to the USA for their own health care when the shit hits the fan. Why don't they stay where things work over and over?

Blah!

Let the rest of the world have single payer health care. And if some people here in the USA want it so bad, let them go where it is. It's not as if there is a lack of places that use single payer.

The USA doesn't need it.

I know I will support people who try to damage and sabotage implementation of this crappy Obamacare and vote for any and all measures to repeal it.

Michael

[caroljane]

With respect Michael, it is the richest people from elsewhere who come to the US for their facelifts and liposuctions, and precautionary heart procedures from the best doctors in the world that money can buy.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Carol,

And why can they get it here where the health care system is so allegedly suboptimal instead of where their own heath care system is so very superior?

Doctors, maybe?

You can't have it both ways. Reality will make sure of that. You need doctors to work in health care.

If you want doctors who are satisfied to be the equivalent of civil servants, that's fine. I'm not.

If you need more than a civil servant, you obviously have to go to where there is a culture of doctors who love what they do enough to innovate--meaning they work in an environment that rewards them for it. That's the only place you will find a doctor like that.

You guys keep your grubby mitts off our health care. It's going to be a mess trying to keep it alive and clean up the train wreck that has started.

There is no need to kill the best on earth when there is so much, as you say, single payer health care in the world that "works over and over." Why not be satisfied with that? If you help kill the best, that's all you will ever have. There will be no best anymore.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

I have nothing against single payer systems as long as participation is entirely voluntary.

But it never is, is it?

Ba'al Chatzaf