The courts will ultimately sort this out. I don’t see why that is a bad thing.
Part of Coulter’s reasoning is that she says that not only would McDaniel have to invalidate the number of votes in the winning margin but that he would also have to prove that these votes were Cochran votes. I do not believe this is correct.
Part of Coulter’s reasoning is that she says that not only would McDaniel have to invalidate the number of votes in the winning margin but that he would also have to prove that these votes were Cochran votes.
Proof that she really doesn’t know what she’s frothing about. I’ve read every article I could find about this issue. I’ve read excerpts from state law. McDaniels does not have to show that the fraudulent votes were Cockroach votes at all; just that there were enough frauddulent votes to invalidate the election. Whatever value Coulter used to have is gone, gone, gone.
You are correct, and this is the point the McDaniel campaign makes.
The legal threshold that needs to be reached/crossed is whether there is sufficient evidence that potentially more invalid votes were cast in favor of the winner than the margin of the winner's vote. If that is the case than the validity of the election is called into question and the remedy would be a redo of the runoff election.
Now, that's how legally it SHOULD be handled. I mean there's a reason that Mississippi Election Law says you can't vote in one party's primary and then vote in the other party's runoff election. There is supposed to be a consequence to that - your vote would be thrown out/invalidated/etc... and thus if there is evidence that there are more votes cast by Democrats in the GOP runoff than the margin by which Cochran won the runoff, then there SHOULD (if there is justice in this world) be a new runoff.