The big mistake here is to think that people that are really uninformed about a subject are informed enough to pick the 'right' side.
To them either side looks equally good, in fact the side that throws the most money at it will probably be able to look better than the other, even when they're not right.
So the trick is to decide the issues in such a way that such support is no longer needed.
Ideally, yes. It'd also be nice if we didn't have so much false-evenhandedness going on in the media to muddy the waters. Actual science reporting from actual scientists and not coal industry reps/lobbyists, but that's a lot to ask.
