Alan Keyes did not complain that he didn’t win. He complained that he didn’t get a lawful, fair race - the only thing he asked for and a thing he is just as entitled to as anybody else in the race.
That’s the point. Winning makes no difference as to whether the race was fair and lawful. If somebody steals his chance to have a lawful process, they have injured him, regardless of what outcomes did or didn’t happen. That’s what EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW means - not that you will be guaranteed any particular result, but that you will have the same legal protections as anybody else. That means that losers are just as protected and have just as many rights in the eyes of the law as winners do.
If you are correct, Keyes had a BETTER chance of winning, since he could have made his case to the voters that Obama wasn’t legally qualified. With no Democrat contender, maybe Keyes would have done better.
But he didn’t make his case to the voters. THAT is where the decision is to be made, not the courts.