Is election math really that hard?

It seems that, for a set of the population, it might be. The current format for reporting election results is that the networks report the current total, that total as a percentage of the counted votes, and the percentage of the votes counted. For a very simple example, in a riding of 100000 people, at the start of the counting the counts could be: Red 9000 90% Blue 1000 10% With 10% of the vote counted As more votes are counted, the score could be: Red 25000 50% Blue 25000 50% With 50% of the vote counted. It could end up being: Red 30000 30% Blue 70000 70% With 100% of the vote counted. Now, if you understand how math works, (and have a decent grasp of time progression) this seems entirely reasonable. The amount of votes keeps increasing for both candidates and the percentages reflect the percentage for each of the percentage counted. But, if you don’t, and you are only looking at the percentages, it can seem odd that some numbers are dropping. To help those people out, and to avoid them complaining about rigged elections as the percentages adjust as more votes are counted, I propose the following change. I believe the networks should report the current total, that total as a percentage of the total votes, and the percentage of the votes counted. So using the previous example of a riding of 100000 people the same results would now look like: Red 9000 9% Blue 1000 1% With 10% of the vote counted As more votes are counted, the score could be: Red 25000 25% Blue 25000 25% With 50% of the vote counted. It could end up being: Red 30000 30% Blue 70000 70% With 100% of the vote counted. This way the percentages only increase as more votes are counted, and they never decrease. It also becomes quite clear when one candidate has won as they finally achieve over 50% of the total votes, not just the current counted total.