You're not the only one who struggled to see "how the lion's share of questions here could not be primarily opinion-based." I, along with many others here and elsewhere on Stack Exchange, struggled with this for a long time... Robert Cartaino put together some pretty good guidelines for constructing questions that discourage answers consisting of little beyond unsubstantiated opinions, but the epiphany for me came with the blog post Real Questions Have Answers which built on Aarobot's answer regarding poll questions. You should take some time to read all of those posts, but the relevant portion boils down to this:
Does the question provide criteria for evaluating the usefulness of the answers?
Everything else builds on that. If the asker constructs a framework for evaluating the answers, then we're no longer left to judge each answer based solely on our own subjective opinions; we can instead attempt to gauge whether or not they solve the asker's problem.
Unfortunately, the question I closed - as well as some of the other questions in your list - fail to provide that framework. We're given a scenario in which the asker feels uncomfortable, but not a desired outcome nor any constraints that might necessarily apply to the solution. That doesn't prevent good answers (there are a couple of them posted there), but it doesn't discourage bad ones either - and worse yet, it robs us of the ability to quickly identify bad answers.
Now, there's a school of thought that says the solution to this is to just clamp down harder on new users when an open-ended question is posted. But while that can buy y'all time to reformulate a question, it doesn't solve anything if you don't.
One of the well-regarded answers on that question was posted by a veteran member of this site, and boils down to "just ignore it". That... Probably doesn't solve the asker's problem. Indeed, if he'd been willing to flesh out his problem a bit more, I suspect we'd find he was already trying to ignore distractions and failing... This has been the case in the past.
And that's the root of the problem here:
Without anything more specific than "how do I deal/handle?", these become classic Agony Aunt questions. The asker is struggling with something, and presents us with his tale of woe... But doesn't identify what he actually wants to accomplish or what's preventing him from accomplishing it. So our army of helpful Agony Aunts jumps into action and lays out their trademark advice. "Toughen up!" "Quit your job!" "Have you tried a nice cup of hot tea?"
They make for good reading while you're having your morning coffee and danish. Hey, Pauline Phillips is dead; gotta get your cheap feelings of moral superiority somewhere, right? But they do not make for good answers.
So when I see questions like this, I follow jmac's advice:
The closest thing we have to a tool for dealing with these questions is the primarily opinion-based close reason
If you don't want to do likewise, then I recommend following jmort's lead:
we can make a huge difference by editing and leaving constructive, helpful comments -- comments which accompany close votes yet are as nice and encouraging as possible. To salvage these posts, we'll have to be a little more forceful in our edits and take some risks.
I did the former earlier, and now I've attempted to do the latter: replacing the closing "how do I personally handle this?" with a specific goal and a request for help in accomplishing it. Note that this completely invalidates several existing answers to the question - in particular, "get over it" is in no way an answer. Invalidating existing answers is never fun; ideally, such corrections would be made before the question is answered - but if there are answers worth preserving, it is better late than never.
Whatever option you choose, don't leave these questions to fester, or pin your hope on a technical solution. Turning these questions into something answerable or shutting them down are the two options here; if you don't do either, they'll assuredly come back to bite you on down the road. It's happened before. And...