With such an analysis as a Presidential election, as ELOG observers put forward early on QUALITY encompasses, and in all spheres of performance, the principal measure of the outcome of a Presidential election, and they were only through with the quantitative aspects of the election at the point of decision chebukati announced 100.01% whereas all the form 34A were either 100% or something like 99.98% anafkiria sisi aje?, i.e "ELOG urges IEBC to ensure that polling materials reach the polling stations on time, we urge the Commission to work with all stakeholders to ensure that they deliver credible, peaceful, free and fair elections." This is a public morality issue and both sides highlighted their moral approach to it.

Working with ALL STAKEHOLDERS as an example of a qualitative assessment. Why didn't chebukati consult with his fellow commissioners and correct the 100.01% to read 100% to save mazematician, the courts, Kenyans, Azimio, me a little bit of their precious time arguing about this. IT is because we the stakeholders are too stupid to be consulted about writing 100% and not 100.01% . The captain should be the last to leave a sinking ship, not the first to run like chebukati. We know people.

Kioni and other azimio members made very serious claims that highlighted some quality issues 'the most corrupt election in history" where money may have changed hands within polling stations amongst party agents and iebc officials, and politicians etc especially in Mt. Kenya, during the progress of the election, some if not most of this was mpesa, one just need to offer more money to such people to spill the beans and show the mpesa message. IEBC did not carry out it's training properly, the cash rule applies to mobile money also. This is unfair.

Guess there is LOADS more to come.