Oh come on. Your argument is the same list of gripes that every driver has with cyclists. Every class of traffic hates every other class of traffic. Always has been that way, always will be.

Go talk to some local government in a town that has a lake and they'll tell you it's exactly the same with all the different things people want to use the lake for (sailing, kayaking, jet skis, water skiing, fishing, etc). I don't know what it is about public resources (like roads and lakes) that turns people into idiots incapable of seeing the other side's point of view but it is damn good at it.

In this case there's a vocal minority of the population that thinks their way of doing things (in this case it's means of transit that we're arguing over) is best and wanting government to prioritize it (at the expense of others, resources are not infinite). It's the same tired old "the way I want is right and everyone else is wrong or less right and should be forced to do things differently" bunch of whining that is found in HOAs and local governments across the country. I and most people don't really care what kind of transportation modes we optimize for as long as it's low cost in both time and money and no less flexible than the existing set of options.

To play devils advocate here (is it really devils advocate if you don't really have a horse in the race?):

>Drivers will change lanes without signaling.

cyclists have hand signals and use them with enough regularity to make BMW drivers look good.

>Drivers will speed up at yellows and run red lights.

When it comes to traffic signals cyclists calling drivers bad is a clear cut case of the pot calling the kettle black. Both groups violate the letter of the law here and both mostly do it in the same predictable ways. I don't see this as a problem for either group, it's just how things are and will be.

>Drivers will consistently go 5-10 mph over the speed limit on the freeway.

Because speed limits are unrealistically slower than reasonable for good conditions on most limited access roads. Why does it matter what they do on limited access roads anyway?

>Drivers will intrude into the crosswalk at intersections.

As if the pedestrians used the crosswalks.

>Drivers will tailgate each other as well as cyclists.

If you're going slower than everyone else wants to go expect to be tailgated (whether there's someone in front of you does not matter). It happens on bike paths with just bike traffic, in hallways, stairwells and even with boats and people operating industrial machinery. People need to take tailgating less personally.

> Drivers will pass cyclists with only a foot or so of passing space so they can save a few seconds of time.

Cyclists will roll stops with near zero regard to the traffic flow (car and pedestrian) at intersections just to save themselves the mild inconvenience of starting from a stop.

>Drivers will be looking at their phone half the time when driving around. Like goddamn, your text can wait!

Cyclists will have headphones in while they ride then have the gall to complain about the situational awareness of drivers. ;)

>but nobody reflexively responds to infrastructure discussion with "okay, but before we talk about fixing that intersection/widening that highway, lemme get all my driver complaints off my chest"

Back in the early 1900s when cars were gaining market share this is exactly what happened.