Why the discrepancy? An examination of the polling methodology reveals a very different set of questions between the two polls.

The YouGov poll asked respondents [PDF]:

Suppose a number of countries decided to take action against Iran in order to
stop Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon. Would you support or oppose your country’s Government taking part or assisting in each of the following?

Respondents were then asked whether they supported or opposed a number of actions including, but not limited to, air strikes. The question puts forth a situation in which a “number of countries” are acting multilaterally to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This hinges on the hypothetical situation that Iran has decided to pursue a nuclear weapon — an assertion that neither the IAEA nor U.S. intelligence officials say there is enough evidence to definitely support — and a multilateral coalition coming together to conduct air strikes.

The United Technologies/National Journal poll released last week asked respondents:

As You May Know, Many In Congress And On The WH ’12 Campaign Trail Have Said That Iran Should Not Be Permitted To Produce A Nuclear Weapon. How Far Do You Think The U.S. Should Go To Prevent This?

This question poses no hypothetical scenarios about Iran pursuing a nuclear weapon or a multilateral effort to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The takeaway from the two contrasting poll results is that Americans are not unconditionally in favor of or opposed to military action against Iran. The IAEA and U.S. intelligence officials have expressed concerns about potential military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program but the YouGov polling question presumes a situation in which Iran is verifiably seeking to acquire a nuclear weapon. Details such as whether Iran must be stopped from constructing a nuclear weapon and the presence of a multilateral military campaign, are very important in determining American support for military action.

But the Christian Science Monitor’s headline, “Bomb Iran? Nearly half of Americans say ‘yes’ to halt nuclear program,” completely overlooks the complexity of the polling questions and the YouGov poll’s revealing insights into American thinking on military action against Iran.

Other provisions of the ACA that are gaining acceptance since November 2010: creating insurance exchanges where people can shop for insurance is up to 59 percent from 51 percent; requiring research to measure the effectiveness of different treatments is now at 53 percent from 44 percent; and providing tax credits to small businesses to help pay for their employees’ insurance is now up 70 percent versus 60 percent.

– Fatima Najiy

Interestingly, the survey also explores why so many — 67 percent — oppose the individual mandate: the most common reasons offered in their own words include that the government shouldn’t be able to force people to do something they don’t want to do (30 percent), that health insurance is too expensive (25 percent), and complaints about the fine for non‐compliance (22 percent):

That top reason sounds an awful lot like a GOP talking point and may say more about the public’s general weariness for larger government than its distaste for this particular provision. But once the requirement kicks in and Americans realize that the law offers a wide array of coverage options without any singular government mandated plan, their trepidation about paying a penalty for going uninsured will likely dissipate.

An earlier Kaiser poll found that people become more supportive of the mandate once they learn more about it. Support substantially grew, for instance, once voters are told that “without the mandate, people might wait until they are seriously ill to obtain coverage, driving up insurance costs for everyone.” Another pro-mandate argument tips the public even more in favor of the provision: “Sixty-one percent of those surveyed support it when told most Americans would still get their coverage through their employers and thus wouldn’t be affected by the mandate.”

But a surprisingly high number of voters are unaware that these these provisions are actually part of the law, with a majority falsely believing the ACA includes a new public option. A third of respondents also “think the law allows a government panel to make decisions about end-of-life care for people on Medicare”:

Kaiser suggests that public disapproval of the law has less to do with the actual provisions in the law — voters either like them or don’t know about them — and more with the “general disillusionment with the state of the country and Washington politics” (and, I would add, the long drawn out and complicated process of actually passing reform). If that’s the case, then the Democrats have a real opportunity to build support for the measure by highlighting and campaigning on some of its best features, a task that will seem less daunting as a growing number of voters begin to actually benefit from the law.

So while Americans oppose a law called the Affordable Care Act, they support its provisions — the individual requirement and a private system of insurance (expressed in the ACA through state-based exchanges that will offer private coverage.) These elements remain popular despite two years of daily attacks and misrepresentations, which seemed to have only heightened the public’s frustration with the political process that created the ACA, while shielding the actual substance from too much disapproval. All this is good news for reform and suggests that it will only grow in popularity once a larger number of Americans benefit from it.

A recent CNN poll also found that “52% of Americans favor mandatory health insurance, up from 44% in June. [...] 47% oppose the health insurance mandate, down from 54% in early summer.”

KING: If we’re not in the news, if we’re not pushing to repeal Obamacare, it doesn’t drive the discussion in the public and the public just begins to move away from it, think okay, the Congress must think it’s impossible. That’s part of what’s going on here.

HEMMER: To be frank and that’s part of the reason why you came on our program today. But I think here is the critical point that Republicans are concerned with. This number [for repeal] is down from only two weeks ago, when it was at 56 percent and a lot of people thought that as long as the system works its way into the blood stream of the American people, that it would be accepted over time. Do you fear that, do you see that happening? [...] Just to be clear on this, back to the question. The longer it’s out there, the more accepting it becomes? That’s what you believe?

Watch it:

Unfortunately, Hemmer has a history of shilling for the Republican party. In 2010, Hemmer asked Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) about the GOP’s prospects in that year’s midterm elections and in formulating his question, betrayed his allegiance to the GOP. “As you evaluate things right now, some five a half months out, I mean, where do we stand,” Hemmer asked. “How strong a position are Republicans?”

A new Rasmussen poll out today finds that “support for repeal is at its lowest level since May, with only 41 percent of respondents saying they “Strongly Favor it.” Sixty-seven percent either strongly oppose repeal or somewhat oppose it. A Bloomberg National poll from last month also showed that support for repealing the Affordable Care Act is declining, “with just 34 percent of the country now favoring repeal of President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul, down from 41 percent six months ago.”

I would have guessed that this was more unstable according to either the national political mood or who’s in office or what. Instead, it’s a steady increase. Mickey Kaus was on Twitter yesterday blaming this on Davis-Bacon, which is a bit difficult to match to the data. I infer from the fact that state/local government is seen as less wasteful than the federal government and that older people have a much higher waste-perception than younger people that this is driven by the fact that people don’t understand Social Security and Medicare. People see state and local government running schools, police departments, fire stations, etc. Then the federal government is sucking up all this money and doing nothing with it. Of course, they’re not doing “nothing,” they’re cutting Social Security checks and paying the tab for Medicare. But people don’t see it that way.

– Rebecca Leber

People seem to be forgetting what the healthcare reform law does, according to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The monthly tracking poll found a sharp decline in the number of people who are aware that the new law will offer financial help to people who must buy insurance on their own, rather than getting it from an employer. Last summer, 72 percent of those polled were aware of that benefit. Now it’s down to 58 percent.

Fewer than half of the respondents knew the law expands Medicaid, down from two-thirds just over a year ago. Only 29 percent knew that the law eliminates cost-sharing for some preventive services, and half said the law did not provide that benefit.

When all you hear about are the lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of reform and fear-mongering about increased costs and erosion of coverage, naturally you’d be reluctant to support reform. Which is why Nancy Pelosi’s now infamous statement — “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it” — may not be the most eloquently expressed sentiment, but remains true: the real test of the measure’s support will come once it is implemented and Americans actually experience its benefits.

The same, by the way, holds for all of the employer surveys about dumping coverage. Asking businesses what they’ll do about a provision that doesn’t go into effect until 2014 today — when some 40 percent are unfamiliar with its details — is just begging for the worst-case scenario that’s grounded in rumors about “big government regulation” than any serious consideration of the actual provisions in the text of the law.

At least six national polls have found that a majority of Americans now favor marriage equality, including a growing number of religious voters. An ABC News/Washington Post from March, similarly found that 63 percent of white Catholics and 57 percent of non-evangelical white Protestants now support marriage equality — huge increases among both groups over the past decade.

On the debt debate, Americans “see a role for reducing spending in deficit reduction,” but majorities continue to say they would not support any reductions to spending on Social Security (62 percent) or Medicare (59 percent), and almost half (48 percent) say the same about Medicaid:

An overwhelming majority — 87 percent — supported “informing women of certain risks of an abortion in advance of performing it,” and 70 percent backed “requiring parental consent for minors and establishing a 24-hour waiting period for women seeking abortions.” Fifty-seven percent, however, said they opposed “laws prohibiting health clinics that provide abortion services from receiving any federal funds”:

Interestingly, the partisan divides are far greater than differences of opinion based on gender:

As the Guttmacher Institute reports, 19 states enacted 80 new anti-abortion laws in the first half of 2011, “up from 23 such laws enacted in 2010 and shattering the previous record of 34 set in 2005.” Eight states have passed laws restricting abortion coverage that is “offered in any private health plan (including coverage through an exchange), and six others have restrictions that apply only to coverage through health exchanges.”

The study also found that despite the GOP’s best efforts to portray reform as a government takeover, the public showed consistent support for government programs. “When polling questions included phrases that described the public option as insurance, similar to Medicare, or available as an option or choice for consumers, support was higher—often considerably higher.” Even the “idea that the federal government should directly sponsor insurance—a major expansion of the government’s role—received strong support,” the researchers concluded:

In a phone interview with ThinkProgress Health, David Grande — one of the authors of the study and an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia — pointed to the GOP’s (false) claim that the Paul Ryan budget protects traditional Medicare for current retirees as an indication of the fact that Republicans have not only poll tested their proposal but also learned from successes and failures of the health reform debate.