Skimming thru media and general public reactions to the tour de cleans, the following admittedly very rough patterns seem to suggest themselves. And there are of course exceptions, ie individuals do not fit into the groups perfectly, etc.
Abstracting from nationalities, the general public can be divided to those who call *** on cycling in general, ie. "they all dope", and those for whom Badzhillah adds the decisive (and, hilariously, only...) degree of freedom and renders Sky transformations too complex to grasp as doped BS, ie. "maybe it's possible after all, who knows really". This is quite unsurpising. Probably the reason Sky & Froome played the badzhillah card to begin with.
Cycling enthusiasts can be lumped into those who watch and those who ride (train and race) and watch. The premise is then shifted somewhat from "they all dope" to "wait a minute, maybe not all, and just look at other sports, we need evidence, new era (equipment, training, cleans, marginal gains)..."... Curiously those who only watch seem to be less willing to buy up the BS. Maybe it is because the data geeks are at an advantage in offering rationalisations, maybe it is because the watchers are more likely to look at the sports' history first and individual efforts (pixels) second, or something else. But. The operating factor in buying up press release level justifications among those who train and race appears to be projection: the fantasy of riders being able to develope, without hard limiters, by just working optimally and hard. Because if the pros can, maybe I can develop as well... This is very understandable, very hilarious and very appalling.
Paradoxically, I'd say that the social group riding competitively, using power measurement devices and data themselves, and in general supposedly having the best clue as to what is exactly going on, seem generally speaking the most likely to start repeating press releases in online commentary of the race.