How does 51% become "most Americans? Explain this to me?

[Skidmore]

I asked this several days ago on DU and got a couple snide, "you ignorant bumpkin" responses and no meaningful answer. 51% is simply 1% more than half. What's more, it's only 1% more than half of those sampled, and the sample may not be representative.

So when you have a barely more than half of the people sampled stat, how does that become "most Americans"?

[ck4829]

1. Welcome to the New America, my friend

The Old America was murdered by Katherine Harris and the Florida GOP during the 2000 Election.

[Benhurst]

7. And a corrupt United States Supreme Court. NT

[tk2kewl]

2. If I have $51 and you have $49, which of us has the MOST money?

:shrug:

[Skidmore]

9. You may have MORE money than I do, but you do not have

the MOST money because the word MOST is used to express a comparative measurement between 3 or more people, units, etc. MORE is used to express comparisons between 2 people or groups.

[MostlyLurks]

11. Ah, so by that logic...

As long as 51% represents the larger value out of at least three choices in the set, "most" could properly be used, could it not?

So if the choice was simply Kerry v. Bush with 49% to 51%, we could NOT use "most", but would use "more" instead. However, once those percentages are split amongst at least three choices - Kerry v. Bush v. Nader v... - then "most" is correct.

Therefore, we prove that "most" is, in fact, proper in this context because 51% represents the largest value of the (at least) three possible groups.

Mostly

[damntexdem]

16. Good points. But ...

remember that 51% for Dubya represents 'most' of the votes, real and faked, counted as cast, no matter how many voters were turned away or turned themselves away from voting sites.

[Skidmore]

19. Exactly, and that same sort of "fuzzy" stat is extended to

poll after poll, with the interpretation always being the opinion reflected is that of "most Americans." It's used on the floor of both the House and the Senate.

[MostlyLurks]

25. That's an unfair extension of the question.

The original question was (paraphrased) "how does 51% represent 'most'".

In a strictly defined way, 51% represents most (i.e. 51% represents the greater/greatest value in the set or system). Additionally, if we extend the argument to the more v. most grammar concept, most STILL qualifies because there are more than two groups represented in the survey/vote.

If you want to add additional aspects to the question, you change the fundamental nature of the question. The question was not "given the election engineering, how can 51% represent 'most'". If you want to add the baggage of (potential) fraud, that changes the entire basis of the question and it must be debated on wholly different merits. Fraud would have to be proven as a point of fact within this debate before we could even get to the issue of whether "most" is merited.

Put simply, 51% represents the most votes (or most of the votes), whether you believe the numbers or not. In other words, your misgivings about the tally are irrelevant (not irrelevant in point of fact, but irrelevant to the question at hand) because the numbers have been accepted into the record (though they may be fraudulent, tainted or skewed): Bush, according to those numbers, won 51% of the vote. That's more votes than anybody else, and the most votes overall.

Mostly

[tx_dem41]

12. Oy vey. n/t

[Dark]

20. 51 % talks about being the most because it represents 3 groups.

The 'most' 51% agree

The 'less' 39% disagree

and the least 10% aren't sure.

4% error, for example, means that the 39% CAN'T be larger than the 51%, even if they both go to polar opposites of the 4% Margin of error.

It's still bullshit, IMO. But this is how it's 'supposed' to work.

[LiberalFighter]

3. It doesn't and never has been properly considered most

But like one respondent to your post... they are ignorant about meaning of words

[The_Counsel]

4. That May Be True...

...but it's still a majority. It's not a "vast majority," but a majority nonetheless.

That said, 51% of a vote based on electoral fear mongering by an incumbent candidate does NOT equal a "mandate." But that's just me. :)

[jaxx]

5. It's the fuzzy math. We see it in everything connected to dubya.

Unemployment rates, consumer confidence, number without insurance, kids who go hungry. All is well. Scary, isn't it?

[porphyrian]

6. The boundaries of "most" have been expanded...

...by corporate advertising. The affect of years of near-constant exposure to merchandising propaganda is a citizenry programmed to accept factual-sounding data and the word of any apparent authority without question. If four out of five doctors agree, its already been accepted and we've moved on to the next item. Thank the media for changing its programming from journalism to infotainment to make a buck as well.

[damntexdem]

18. 'Most' means the greatest in number.

That includes when there are two numbers being compared. The comparative 'more' is used for any two , whether or not there are more than two.

The real issue with 'most voted for Dubya' is not the use of the word 'most' for 51%, it's the fraud in the election that resulted in a reported 51% for Dubya.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. In a winner-take-all system, that really doesn't matter.

That one percent could even be whittled down to one vote and it'd all be the same.

[MostlyLurks]

10. How is it not?

Dictionary.com defines "most" thusly: Being one of a large indefinite number; numerous.

By that definition, 51% represents "most": 51% of the populous/voters/whatever is the larger value in the two value set, with the other value being no higher than 49%. Additionally, there could be other values, such "No Opinion", that further dilute the possible 49%. For example, if 3% answered "No Opinion" or something akin to that, then 51% is clearly representative of "most" respondants, with the closest other value being 46%.

Given the nebulous nature of "most", in that it is attached to no single numeric value or ratio, I'd say anything greater than a majority qualifies as "most". For example, if I had three red M&M's and two blue ones, wouldn't I be right in saying "most of the M&M's are red"? I certainly think that's valid. Granted, in terms of a percentage, those three represent 60% of the set, but the point is still valid: there's only one more red than there is blue, but "most" is certainly a reasonable word in the context.

Mostly

[triguy46]

13. I will step into the grammatical morass....

I think it takes three to have a "most". There's comparative case with two instances, one of which is "more." Then the superlative in which one can be "most".

Is there an English teacher playing hooky on DU right now?

[triguy46]

27. I have verified that my explaination is correct...

because my wife, and English teacher of 27 years says so!! You can only use the superlative (most) when there are 3 objects being compared. If you are comparing two, you must use the comparative (more).

[damntexdem]

14. Actually, most is [B] not [/B] 51% --

50% + 1 is most.

[SoCalDem]

15. The consolation..? Probably less than 20% ever read or hear that 51%

think this or that:)

[MazeRat7]

17. My take.. imprecise language this english is. *grin.

[Ioo]

21. Republican Math... Better than real math

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. 'most' (adjective) = 'the majority of'

in a dictionary.

[Egalitariat]

23. 51% is the very definition of "most". I don't understand your question?

**

[Vickers]

24. OK, fuck it, you're a bumpkin

:P

[Clark2008]

26. Well, then, MOST Americans think the country is headed in

the wrong direction and MOST Americans think the Iraqi War was a bad idea.

That's what needs to be focused on at this point. We're not going to undo the election, sadly. The MOST we can hope for is a Democratic Senate and articles of impeachment, at this point.