Let's get it into the Dictionary: "The Diebold Margin".

[Tom Rinaldo]

We know what it means of course, but if we keep throwing it into conversations as a shorthand phrase it can enter the larger culture. Someday I want to read in a dictionary of slang: "The Diebold Margin; a margin of victory needed by a candidate winning an election, that is sufficiently large enough to ensure that the results can not plausibly be reversed using rigged election machines to fraudulently tabulate the vote."

[tecelote]

1. Try posting it on Wikipedia.

[Ezlivin]

2. Live free or Diebold

Yeah, you ought to add that to Wikipedia.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. It would work better if it was in wide use first

and people then went to a dictionary to look it up.

[tecelote]

4. If you add it to Wikipedia, then anyone searching Diebold

would find it. Usually people using Wikipedia are researching and include many writers.

Wikipedia is an amazing new tool for defining our world.


"Live Free or Diebold" - thanks for that one.

[IndyOp]

5. But there *isn't* a margin in terms of stealing an election --

They can flip a 70/30 race to a 30/70 race without leaving a trace.

If there is any sort of margin it is how much they can steal without *everyone* realizing the theft -- if 90% of all eligible people voted and the margin were huge - 70/30 or 80/20 - then people would be more likely to realize the theft, but not necessarily able to prove that it had happened.

Exit polls aren't reliable, haven't you heard? :sarcasm:

[mark11727]

6. Another tack would be to use it as a verb ---

...as in Diebold (verb): to manipulate numerical data in order to facilitate a favorable outcome examples:

(1)"..maybe we'd better Diebold those estimates to keep the account happy..."

(2)"..just Diebold your charitable contributions on your tax returns, they never check."

(3)".. I Diebolded my timesheet last week to make the project look like it's going quicker than it really is."

And so on. :)

[mrgorth]

7. These are good ideas.

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. We don't have to prove fraudulent voting machines

If we can establish that a significant percentage of Americans simply don't trust them. That threshold may have to be as high as a third to bring about the results we want. Once it is blatantly obvious that Americans are seriously losing faith that their votes will be counted as cast, that becomes the driving reason for real reform. We won't even need an actual smoking gun, just widespread satire and sarcasm about "having our votes counted". As long as people don't seem upset by it, they will persist. Hence using "diebolding" and related phrases in as many contexts as possible moves the ball forward.