This is issue polling. There are lots of problems with issue polling, but even when delivered well, the fundamental problem is it's not concrete. Poll people to see if they'd like the option to stop paying for health insurance: you'll get Assad numbers. Now write a ballot initiative for single payer, where customers see the tax price tag, and have to worry about losing their current private health insurance: the numbers fall through the floor. This isn't supposition: it's happened over and over for the past several election cycles. People do not like this idea as a concrete thing.

I'm a Coloradan who voted for the 2016 universal healthcare (aka ColoradoCare) proposal, but I understand why the majority (79%) voted against it: there was sticker shock at the additional 10% income tax (with caveats, but people saw the 10%) and an inability of proponents to answer basic questions such as "Will I be able to keep my current doctor?", "Will I be able to get an abortion?", and "Will there be additional tax increases?".

I remember polling either done at the same time or the same pollster that found different approval ratings for Obamacare and the ACA. Its like dihydrogen monoxide vs water.

Right, but the point is (I'm belaboring) we don't have to rely on issue polling at all here, because has repeatedly made it to actual ballots, which are the votes that actually count.

The public is very dissatisfied with the current situation. However, they reject any solution put forward.

Approval is high for "Something Else" but low for the alternatives.