A CBS poll says about 2/3 of Americans think the government should provide health care for all. Many in the poll think the government would suck at it (about half said the government would do a worse job, and less than a third think it would do a better job).
Given how important health care is to people, I find it hard to reconcile these two opinions. If I had to guess, most people who say they are for government health care implicitly imagine a two-tier system, where they would still get the good care they have today, but poor people who people imagine are without care today (actually they tend to be without insurance, not without care) would get a suckier second tier of health care run by the government.
But I don't think this is a realistic view of what they will get with universal health care. No government-run universal health care system is ever going to be politically stable with two tiers. You are going to have to end up with a system that some poor people get better care but the rich and middle class end up with a worse system. That is the reality of every government run health care system in the world.
I would love to see the answer to this poll question:
"Would you support a system of government-run universal health care that guaranteed health care access for all Americans, but would result in you personally getting inferior care than you get today in terms of longer wait times, more limited doctor choices, and with a higher probabilities of the government denying you certain procedures or medicines you have access to today."