Voters rallied to cast their ballots in the midterms on Tuesday, November 6, with voter turnout hitting a 50 year high. Yet as people strived to make their voices heard, some controversial candidates also made it into office.

Rep. Steve King (R) of Iowa was re-elected despite possessing what can only be described as blatant racism. He has met with and tweeted support for far-right, extremist and Nazi-linked political candidates both in the U.S. and abroad.

In a 2013 interview with Newsmax, King warned that for every migrant child who becomes a valedictorian, there are 100 “who weigh 130 pounds and they’ve got calves the size of cantaloupes because they’re hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.” Now five years later, The Weekly Standard has released an audio interview of him equating migrants to “dirt,” showing that not only has his prejudice not changed, but his comments have become even more brazen. When confronted with this fact, King attempted to deflect the blame onto the “leftist media” despite The Weekly Standard being a conservative journal.

On the other side of the aisle, Senator Bob Menendez (D) of New Jersey survived a controversial race after his bribery case ended in a hung jury and prosecutors decided not to press additional charges.

Three other candidates were also voted into office while out on bail. Rep. Chris Collins (R) was indicted on 11 counts involving insider trading and fraud in August. Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) has been indicted for 3 years on charges of securities fraud and is still awaiting a trial date. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R) was indicted for violating campaign finance laws.

The infamous pimp Dennis Hof (R) was even elected posthumously as representative of his Nevada district, regardless of  facing an investigation into sexual assault claims and accusations of mistreatment at his brothels. It is fair to note, however, that his death might have been the reason for his victory. The Republican Party can now replace him with a more establishment candidate of its choosing and that could very well have influenced voters to check the box next to his name.

The successful election of these corrupt and racist candidates brings up the all-too familar question during the 2016 presidential campaign: Out of all the possible candidates that ran, why were some of the most biased and unethical successful? The regions these candidates won in lean heavily in the favor of that candidate’s party. Democrats wouldn’t have had a chance in a district like Hof’s, and Republicans wouldn’t have had one in a district like Menendez’s. So, it is not about the candidate’s possible corruption or questionable morals. Instead, it is about their views on issues like gun control, abortion and immigration. The question left to ask is whether we want these officials to be those representing the American people.