It wasn't well written and it wasn't very useful, but I was carrying on with the idea of "how far in the political arena this is an argument between people who agree about the importance of achieving universal health care," and trying to identify who might not even agree with that premise. We can only guess who and how many don't even care about the fundamntal fairness / universal access goals.

I was just trying to think who, if any, might be in that category besides the 10% in my earlier (wild) guess.

For your category of "opponents of the proposals [who] have no intention at all of achieving [universal access]," the answer would be very close to zero by their openly stated arguments. I didn't mean that you were making gross generalizations, I really meant that it was uncomfortable for me that I was trying to engage in mass mind reading.

(I know some Pennsylvanians who fit squarely within Obama's guns and religion classification, were highly offended at the time, and now have knee-jerk reactions against *anything* he says, while still presenting entirely rational reasons for their opposition to these proposals.)