Not the friendliest way to reply, but are you saying 65% does not mean most? Just wondering if we're violently agreeing. I shouldn't have said 80%. Was just trying to articulate that most is a high threshold and also not defined as an absolute number.

Cambridge does not have the best definition, imo, but even going by that the first definition would mean any plurality would qualify as "most" - setting the threshold potentially lower than 50%.

I prefer Merriam Webster, which is far more clear. Definition 2 (defn 1 does not apply in this context): https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/most

We have multiple parties in Canada.

There may be a minority government elected, with 40% of the seats, and 30%, 20%, 10% to other parties.

The 40% party will be described as winning the most seats.

Ha, I gotta say after reading your reply I feel kind of dumb for even saying the 80%; I had blinders on. Most, when it's relative, is the highest of a set even if that number is super low. Totally spaced on that when I asked, but I was fixated on how it's used to define something that's a percentage like in the 65% example. It happens so frequently in journalism and it's frustrating because it's trying to make an argument that sometimes the numbers themselves don't support.

Anyway, appreciate you reminding me (and I deserved to feel dumb so also making me feel a bit dumb about it).

Yes, that is definition 1 (merriam-webster). This definition is often invoked by saying "the" before "most," as you did.

It's a different definition than defn 2 (m-w), which is what is used when saying "Most farms are not owned by farmers."

"The 40% party won the most seats" carries a different meaning than "The 40% party won most seats"

It's more complicated. They got "the most" seats but they didn't get "most" seats.

Pure "most" is implicitly that option versus all the rest.

No, "most" is not a high threshold. You can say "most" about 30% of something in a group, if the rest are splintered between other groups getting less than 30%.

Maybe you should read the link I provided. It would likely clear up a lot of misconceptions for you.

You have a misconception about what the word means. Most has a meaning: more than any other quantity. > 50% meets that definition every time, but even 2% could mean ‘most’ if everything else in the comparison is less than 2%.

You're right about the 2% and I just totally had blinders on when thinking of "most" used when comparing a set of numbers (where one of those numbers is the most in the set). I disagree with your ">50% meets..." comment, but pretty sure we're not going to agree on that one so I'll just shut up now.