I hear you. I don’t think I saw the SPC or local news go over the top with this. I think a lot of the general public expects imby precision that just isn’t possible. I don’t know how we get over that communication gap, but I think that’s a big piece of it.
I am a believer of only using extreme language in extreme events but your “chance of a tornado” example isn’t a case of that. If there’s a tornado risk albeit small, how do you leave that out of a forecast? Usually what I do is try to explain the SPC percentages. People tend to get that.
For example, there’s a risk, but it’s 2%. There’s a greater chance of wind damage so let’s focus on that. If I need to explain more I do. If I see something that enhances or mitigates a risk I (usually) say it.