I am well aware of that. But those phrases also make up a small portion of most contracts. So I stand by my, "the vast majority".
Furthermore I believe we are one well-argued case away from concluding that consumer contracts are not enforceable if the language is too complex. Consider. You only have an enforceable contract if there is a meeting of minds. Automated complexity tests show that most consumer contracts require college level reading level to understand. Per https://www.wyliecomm.com/2019/03/us-literacy-rate/ it turns out that only 2% of US adults read at that level. Therefore no contract can exist with anyone in the remaining 98% of the public.
For comparison, 13% of Americans speak Spanish. Which means that if you the average consumer contract would be understood by more Americans if it was rewritten into plain Spanish!
We all know that this is true and the current state of affairs is beyond absurd. I do not believe that this absurdity will survive indefinitely.
We already have automated tests of language complexity. There already are courts that have said that materials have to be available to consumers in a form that they can understand. For example see http://www.illinoiscourts.gov/Media/enews/2018/032118_plain_... for such a ruling in Illinois. To end the absurdity just takes one clear precedent saying that a contract is not enforceable if not understood, and cannot assume to have been understood by the average consumer if it requires a reading level of over X on test Y.