Yep. Never use a ten dollar word when a 50 cent one does the job better. The left wing needs to dump it's highbrow (and cringe celebrity endorsements) and use the language of the common people in simple terms that cannot be demonised (or would sound insane to try).

Also, this is a prime example of how demonising words, especially buzzwords, is the strategy they use to make it lose all rationality with the public... the notion of being "woke" originally a good thing, welfare a good thing, etc...

I get the critical comments here, but I think there's a basic association of the word "welfare" with the CURRENT system of assistance which leaves too many people out. Democrats have made the current apparati too hard to qualify for with their means-testing. If they were sincere in working for the masses, they would push more universal programs, but at least on the national level, they are bought out by the same corporations as the Republicans.

Godamnnnnn we are fucking monkey smooth brain fucks

The issue is entirely a media problem. Can you tell yet?

Did the study define the kinds of assistance at all or was it simply the choice of terms?

“Welfare” is defined and had a lot of baggage with it. Opinion about welfare can be wildly different individually and demographically.

“Assistance” isn’t defined, people can place their own restrictions on what that hypothetical assistance is, who gets it based on their own prejudices, needs, and ideology.

FREEDOM DIVIDEND 🦅🇺🇸

Assistance implies that it is temporary, that it is help to help themselves.

Welfare implies that it is continuous.

If you have to continually support a part of the population then you have a systemic problem. The correct solution would be to change the system. People who support the continuation of the current system either profit from it or don't see an advantage in a change.

One of the main reasons why USAID was the first part of the government targeted was because of things like this.

If you frame their work as "Assistance to disasters" or other variations, plus the context of it being under 1% of the Federal budget, Americans were find with it. If you call it "giving taxpayer money to foreigners" then it's wildly unpopular.

Which is to say that the lesson is that most people are idiots and have no idea what's going on in the world. Framing a narrative can get the same individual to simultaneously support and hate literally the same thing. It can get people to support policies and actions that directly harm them.

IIRC "ACA" and "Obamacare" had similar divides. Propaganda is a helluva drug.

Could you share the source for the graph please?

because welfare has been propagandized as used by "lazy and homeless, and poors, and blacks" its usually based on racism as well, the true welfare queens are Conservative voters.

Ah, ~40% of Americans are complete fucking morons, that sounds about right.

~40% of Americans also read and write at an elementary school level or worse, but I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

... I think we've found the mythical 'independent, median voter'.

One of many lasting “gifts” of Reagan.