Let's begin at the federal level where polls indicate an 11% approval rating of Congress, yet the counting of votes re-elects 96.4% of the incumbents. This might well resonate as a very stupid American citizen if the counting, by Republican owned software, was in fact on the up and up. If the numbers are correct shame on those casting votes on proven losers.
In Kentucky, for example, Mitch McConnell was drawing fewer than 100 people at his recent gatherings, with many of those driving from out of the state of Kentucky, not even legal voters in that state. At the same time his opponent was reaching as many as 16,000 at the same time as McConnell's "crowd" was sub-hundred. On election day crowds appear to be up in numbers at the voting places, yet in the final tally of votes McConnell won by a landslide. Are Kentucky voters naÃ¯ve, or were their votes rigged? Unfortunately, there is no way to determine in the present method in use, so one can only conclude the voters knew not what they were doing.
The same indicates to be true in many other federal elections. Of course in most there is the "gerrymandered difference" that may attribute to the "victory" of some incumbents. For example, knowing Paul Ryan is pushing hard to eliminate Social Security as we now have it, it would seem anyone would be hard pressed to give him a pass to continue on with that, knowing that, if not them, their children and grandchildren will be screwed in order a few may gain huge profits at their expense.
On the state level almost all states in which the governor literally stole democracy, sold assets built by the tax payer, devastated the environment, over-threw elected officials in favor of appointed ones, took healthcare away from citizens, impoverished education, turned down federal programs that would have created thousands of jobs, devastated the economy of their state, yet we are to assume the people voted for more of the same as the likes of Walker, Kasich, Snyder, Scott, and others won re-election, in some of those cases by landslide margins.
Also, in several cases the votes counted showed winners while issues on the ballot they were against won. This might indicate bi-polar voters who want one thing yet vote for someone who will try to make certain they don't get it. Again, maybe the people truly "don't get it" when they cast their vote, or their vote isn't being counted as they had intended.
The outcomes of this election demands a thorough investigation of our voting processes, not so much from the bogus illegal voters, but from the possible fraudulent vote counting. Of course, an investigation could be eliminated if we completely throw out the man made software programs and replace them by paper and pencil casting of votes and observed people counted votes. That process may take longer to complete, but may well eliminate the years of suffering the software, not the people, decides who should make the laws.
The time to start changing the process is now, not waiting until weeks before the next election. Do we really want a software program to tell us who the next president is going to be, or do we, the people, want to decide?