Do you not have a model of people who disagree with you that includes sincere belief that the policies don't work? Policy is more complicated than wishing for s

Do you not have a model of people who disagree with you that includes sincere belief that the policies don't work? Policy is more complicated than wishing for something and having it work out exactly the way you want: people voting against the ACA or free college may think it'll legitimately hurt the economy. FWIW, I'm a pretty strong supporter of the ACA (relative to the counterfactual, though single-payer would be nice..), and I'm neutral to warm about free universal college (much of the problem with the way college fits into our economy is that it's used as a blunt employment filter instead of actually increasing human capital, and universalizing subsidies may just exacerbate the problem. OTOH, blowing up that filter and making college the new high school may be useful in and of itself). Neither of those opinions prevents me from understanding that people may have different models of what the effects of these policies are likely to be. You may argue that it requires a degree of economic illiteracy to believe that, but 1) the majority of supporters for every policy are grossly economically illiterate, 2) there's a core of sound economically-literate arguments for almost every policy, and 3) economic illiteracy is a vastly different charge from "you're in a cult that prefers winning to improving your and others' lot in society". I suspect that it would be pretty easy for someone to take the confident, unnuanced opinions you likely have on a host of similar issues and make a similar or at least symmetric charge about your motivations.