I think some automated cleanup would be beneficial, although it would have to be carefully considered. Wikipedia uses bots quite successfully in this way. Despite what users on meta claim, manual community cleanup is not sufficient to keep up with the incorrect grammar and typos. Take a look through any random selection of questions on Stack Overflow. You'll find them full of errors, even ones with lots of votes and answers.
I think the truth is most people just don't really care, as long as the intent of the question can be discerned well enough to provide some kind of answer. I don't have any hard evidence, but I suspect the vast majority of 2K+ users don't edit much at all. It's easier to just vote to close. Personally, I edit every now and again if I like a question, but it's pretty boring and completely thankless work.
In a related way, I also think a lot of tag cleanup tasks could be automated (I think some already are), but that wasn't a popular opinion.
One thing that does surprise me is how ambivalent/negative the reaction seems to be to this sort of proposal. On a website dominated by people whose job it is to automate things, I find the answer 'we have people to do that manually' difficult to understand.
I'd definitely appreciate some insight from those who prefer the other side of this particular fence.