How do you expect this message to reach 330 million people?

Essentially you are asking folks to think in gray scale, not black and white. Of course I agree.

My view is propaganda (good propaganda) in massive quantities is needed. A diversion to issues and goals that unite.

Example 1. Smoking is not healthy. Until a massive propaganda effort illustrated the dangers to offset tobacco industry ads claiming tobacco as good for you, the use of tobacco finally declined by 40% in terms of use per million. Yes banning use in bars, restaurants etc moved use down but the propaganda was essential to support laws against second hand smoke.

Example 2. Clean energy is being promoted as a solution to climate change. But only 60% believe it is man made, only 40% think it will affect them in their life time. So the voters are divided on investment and laws to counter climate change. Ok promote benefits that some on both sides can agree. Clean energy reduces oil demand that lowers Middle East profits, profits that funded 9/11 and ongoing Terrorists. Lower oil demand in the US means more US oil exports and reduces the risk of yet another Middle East war. Clean energy reduces lung pollution which reduces what you pay was medical insurance. Clean energy lowers the household cost of heating and cooling. Propaganda on these points is more likely to win additional support. It is gray scale thinking, not black and white climate change is bad (white), there is no man made climate change (black). Note the oil industry is generating propaganda to oppose clean energy to enhance their profits but not in ways that are direct. Many on the left and right can agree that less cost is good, fewer Middle East wars is good…

The core issue is not philosophical. It is tribal. Example, People would rather risk dying then counter their tribes view of wearing masks.

To reach 10 or 20% of folks on both sides to embrace the gray area of constant improvement, massive investments in propaganda is needed, with a message both sides already agree on.