Good post.

The conditions on Earth with thick atmosphere, water vapor, weather etc. that dissolves, crushes, or clumps ultra-fine dust, don't really prepare people mentally to understand the difficulty.

People think "dust" and equate it to their house. Or maybe if they've been in the military or traveled, and have been exposed to desert dust or dust storms. The latter adds some understanding, but still doesn't really convey the difference between Earth-dust, and ultra-fine particulates in vacuum or near-vacuum.

The vacuum on the Moon with zero erosion, and dust charging from sunlight and radiation will make it a challenge. Apollo astronauts had irritation and symptoms, fortunately the exposure was limited and short.

It'll be a much bigger issue for longer Moon missions that have EVA activity. Especially because the dust is very sharp and jagged, never being exposed to weather. That can mean it's got Asbestos-like qualities.

The public at large typically doesn't understand downstream domino-effects from engineering changes in something somewhat simpler like automobiles. Automobiles that they may own and use every day. And will complain about how the Tesla battery isn't a replaceable box that goes in the trunk etc.

So expecting them to understand the same thing on a space mission, that has zero chance of being given maintenance or repairs, and the mass and power consumption can affect if the destination is even reached, or the mission even happens... and all of it, including changes and testing, has to be ready up against various launch-window hard deadlines that don't budge for anyone.

Probably a bridge too far.

It's nice to imagine that they all could though. The side benefits of such voters on economics, energy policy, medicine/epidemiology, all sorts of things would be enormous.