[tired_old_conservative]

No, your instant replay analogy refutes that. A call may be wrong, but if the determination to review it does not occur when it is allowed, the game goes on and has a victor nonetheless.

The vote count was completed. To deny that is to simply become the same as one of those deadenders denying that Bush was ever President. If it makes you feel better, by all means, but its a proposition that won't be taken seriously in the real word. Advancing it simply impeaches the credibility of whatever evidence it is you believe you have.

[butterdezillion]

Which is a legally-required procedure: the call for objections, or the objections themselves? According to the rules what HAD to be done?