Thanks all for participating in this thread. It appears I was operating under a misapprehension that "the valid fears and concerns of the American people" meant something other than "the fears and concerns of American people".

You have run into the issue of language being fuzzy. Mathematics is precise. If you intended for people to "use common sense" common sense is not common. If you were looking for the mythical standard America, she doesn't exist.

Perhaps what you wanted is what items concern 25% of more of Americans. Studies of such are done by firms like PEW so that candidates know what topics to rail about and where geographically it will play best. Obviously what they are will change with the demographics of any population, age, sex, party affiliation, ethnicity, etc. Again much money is spent researching this.

Perhaps that's it, though I suspected there was something more going on. In a discussion of US politics, the use of the definitive article from an historian suggested to me that readers should recollect terms like "we the people of the United States" (are "the American people" the same group as "the people of the United States"?). I see now I was over-thinking it, no such allusion was intended.

With "valid" being in the eye of the beholder, and "validity" a matter of opinion, the terms are not fuzzy, they're meaningless (if there are > 100 million distinct definitions for valid, and no one definition is of any more use than another, the term is of no utility in a discussion). English will survive the loss of these words as devices to carry meaning, alternatively, those that believe such things about words like "valid" are in error (which is a, admittedly, minority view here; sorry j mercer, looks it's just you and me).

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Thanks all for participating in this thread. It appears I was operating under a misapprehension that "the valid fears and concerns of the American people" meant something other than "the fears and concerns of American people".

You have run into the issue of language being fuzzy. Mathematics is precise. If you intended for people to "use common sense" common sense is not common. If you were looking for the mythical standard America, she doesn't exist.

Perhaps what you wanted is what items concern 25% of more of Americans. Studies of such are done by firms like PEW so that candidates know what topics to rail about and where geographically it will play best. Obviously what they are will change with the demographics of any population, age, sex, party affiliation, ethnicity, etc. Again much money is spent researching this.

Perhaps that's it, though I suspected there was something more going on. In a discussion of US politics, the use of the definitive article from an historian suggested to me that readers should recollect terms like "we the people of the United States" (are "the American people" the same group as "the people of the United States"?). I see now I was over-thinking it, no such allusion was intended.

With "valid" being in the eye of the beholder, and "validity" a matter of opinion, the terms are not fuzzy, they're meaningless (if there are > 100 million distinct definitions for valid, and no one definition is of any more use than another, the term is of no utility in a discussion). English will survive the loss of these words as devices to carry meaning, alternatively, those that believe such things about words like "valid" are in error (which is a, admittedly, minority view here; sorry j mercer, looks it's just you and me).

I'm not sure valid is out of the language. I think it perhaps has no meaning applied to a feeling like fear. I do think it has meaning applied to an object like a concert ticket. The latter of course it is a stand in for the more precise word counterfeit.

valid: adjective
1) Well grounded in logic, truth or having legal force
2) Still legally acceptable

I'm not sure a fear can be grounded in logic. Obviously legality has no application.

It reminds me almost of good and evil. It is good or bad the lion catches and eats the prey? If you worry about the lion having enough food you will answer one way. If you worry about the prey escaping you will answer another. Which worry is valid?

---

Thanks all for participating in this thread. It appears I was operating under a misapprehension that "the valid fears and concerns of the American people" meant something other than "the fears and concerns of American people".

You have run into the issue of language being fuzzy. Mathematics is precise. If you intended for people to "use common sense" common sense is not common. If you were looking for the mythical standard America, she doesn't exist.

Perhaps what you wanted is what items concern 25% of more of Americans. Studies of such are done by firms like PEW so that candidates know what topics to rail about and where geographically it will play best. Obviously what they are will change with the demographics of any population, age, sex, party affiliation, ethnicity, etc. Again much money is spent researching this.

Perhaps that's it, though I suspected there was something more going on. In a discussion of US politics, the use of the definitive article from an historian suggested to me that readers should recollect terms like "we the people of the United States" (are "the American people" the same group as "the people of the United States"?). I see now I was over-thinking it, no such allusion was intended.

With "valid" being in the eye of the beholder, and "validity" a matter of opinion, the terms are not fuzzy, they're meaningless (if there are > 100 million distinct definitions for valid, and no one definition is of any more use than another, the term is of no utility in a discussion). English will survive the loss of these words as devices to carry meaning, alternatively, those that believe such things about words like "valid" are in error (which is a, admittedly, minority view here; sorry j mercer, looks it's just you and me).

I'm not sure valid is out of the language. I think it perhaps has no meaning applied to a feeling like fear. I do think it has meaning applied to an object like a concert ticket. The latter of course it is a stand in for the more precise word counterfeit.

valid: adjective
1) Well grounded in logic, truth or having legal force
2) Still legally acceptable

I'm not sure a fear can be grounded in logic. Obviously legality has no application.

It reminds me almost of good and evil. It is good or bad the lion catches and eats the prey? If you worry about the lion having enough food you will answer one way. If you worry about the prey escaping you will answer another. Which worry is valid?

Again perhaps; I'll not argue that valid is an appropriate adjective for fear, it's not really my area of expertise. Perhaps others will agree, though if they do not, I have to wonder what they believe what would be included in the set of "invalid fears".

On the lion question, I suspect the issue is one of anthropomorphism.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Thanks all for participating in this thread. It appears I was operating under a misapprehension that "the valid fears and concerns of the American people" meant something other than "the fears and concerns of American people".

You have run into the issue of language being fuzzy. Mathematics is precise. If you intended for people to "use common sense" common sense is not common. If you were looking for the mythical standard America, she doesn't exist.

Perhaps what you wanted is what items concern 25% of more of Americans. Studies of such are done by firms like PEW so that candidates know what topics to rail about and where geographically it will play best. Obviously what they are will change with the demographics of any population, age, sex, party affiliation, ethnicity, etc. Again much money is spent researching this.

So why not go with something like "Perhaps what you wanted is what items concern 25% of more of Americans"?

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

That 25% figure is a bit... restrictive.


According to a Gallup poll taken between May 18 and May 22, 2016, the TOP issue (the economy) only got 19%.

Only 3 issues (the economy, plus immigration and healthcare) got 10% or more.

16 issues only got single-digit percentages, 'nothing' got 3%, and 'no opinion' got 4%.

The question:

Regardless of who wins the election, what single issue or challenge are you most interested in having the next president address when he or she takes office next January?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/191960/economy-remains-top-priority-next-president.aspx?g_source=POLITICS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

'The American People' is a set composed of a large number of diverse individuals.

A single issue that concerns or makes fearful *everyone* in the USA?? There isn't one. There is a long list of issues that concern or make fearful some of us.

Going and doing some research on Pew's website, or one similar to it (such as Gallup, as I did) is very good advice. Just be prepared for a VERY diverse list of answers.

That 25% figure is a bit... restrictive.


According to a Gallup poll taken between May 18 and May 22, 2016, the TOP issue (the economy) only got 19%.

Only 3 issues (the economy, plus immigration and healthcare) got 10% or more.

16 issues only got single-digit percentages, 'nothing' got 3%, and 'no opinion' got 4%.

The question:

Regardless of who wins the election, what single issue or challenge are you most interested in having the next president address when he or she takes office next January?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/191960/economy-remains-top-priority-next-president.aspx?g_source=POLITICS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

'The American People' is a set composed of a large number of diverse individuals.

A single issue that concerns or makes fearful *everyone* in the USA?? There isn't one. There is a long list of issues that concern or make fearful some of us.

Going and doing some research on Pew's website, or one similar to it (such as Gallup, as I did) is very good advice. Just be prepared for a VERY diverse list of answers.

Thanks MK.

I suspect that our OP coming from his background did not realize the extreme diversity that is America. They have called us the melting pot. We may be all melted together. We aren't a mixing pot however.

As to those poll results, 19% for the economy, what was it when Shrub left office?

---

There is a comprehensive list of electoral issues at https://www.isidewith.com/polls

***************
@Gary

what was it when Shrub left office?

2007/8 was the peak of the sub-prime crisis. So presumably financial concerns would have been quite high, I imagine.

Thanks MK.

I suspect that our OP coming from his background did not realize the extreme diversity that is America. They have called us the melting pot. We may be all melted together. We aren't a mixing pot however.

As to those poll results, 19% for the economy, what was it when Shrub left office?

Near as I can determine from the graph:

In Jan 2009 (when Dubya left office),

The Economy (in general) polled around 55%...

BUT...

Jobs/unemployment polled only around 11%.

The first graph on this page:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158267/economy-dominant-issue-americans-election-nears.aspx

Near as I can determine from the graph:
In Jan 2009 (when Dubya left office),
The Economy (in general) polled around 55%...
BUT...
Jobs/unemployment polled only around 11%.
The first graph on this page:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/158267/economy-dominant-issue-americans-election-nears.aspx

To me it looks that one third are concerned about economy in general and one third are concerned about jobs.

Near as I can determine from the graph:
In Jan 2009 (when Dubya left office),
The Economy (in general) polled around 55%...
BUT...
Jobs/unemployment polled only around 11%.
The first graph on this page:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/158267/economy-dominant-issue-americans-election-nears.aspx

To me it looks that one third are concerned about economy in general and one third are concerned about jobs.

2009... left side of the graph. The right side was 2012-13...

To me it looks that one third are concerned about economy in general and one third are concerned about jobs.

2009... left side of the graph. The right side was 2012-13...

I see.
Wasn't that the time when the subprime mortgage crisis was?
That make sense.
But without a job you don't get any loans.
Sad but true and it's like that here as well.
So the lack of jobs must be a valid fear for anyone.