For anybody else who is following along just let me say: It cannot be known which person had the most votes if it’s never been determined whether all the votes will stand or whether they will be disqualified because of an objection. The vote count was stopped in mid-process, before any potential objections and disqualifications were addressed. There is no way to legally know what the final count ever was because the final step in the process never happened.
That’s like ending last year’s Nebraska-Texas football game without ever waiting to hear the result of the officials’ review to see whether one second needed to be put back on the clock. You’re not done if the results of a review are still pending. If you’re a Nebraskan and you celebrate winning the game when you know the play is being reviewed you’re a moron.”
Actually, you're stepping outside of the process and assuming “objection in perpetuity,” which is a common error. It's also known as the unstated objection, implicit objection, etc.
In your football analogy, there are rules as to when a replay determination will be made. Some are automatic, some are inferential, and some can be requested by a coach. Note, however, that none of those rules can be invoked by the fans in the stand. They don't get to challenge the people actually running the game.
Further, if the decision to make a replay determination does not occur, the issue is moot once another play has been run. That is, the time for objection has passed and the game unfolds without further recourse. The fact that fans in the stadium are watching an instant replay and believe a call was wrong is immaterial. That's also the result if anyone disagrees with the official. If the official had decided that, “nope there isn't a second left,” Texas could have argued until it was blue in the face and the game would still have been over with Nebraska victorious. That decision could not be repeatedly revisited by everyone with a sense of grievance. That's one of the things that rules, or legal processes, are intended to do—provide closure.
In the case of Obama’s election, there was a time for the “officials” (i.e., state election officials, electors, Congresspersons, and Vice-President Cheney) to object. They didn't do so. No replay review was initiated and the next play was run. The Presidential election process reached its conclusion with Obama victorious. Legally, that decision cannot be revisited by everyone with a sense of grievance.
You may firmly believe you have proof that Obama was not eligible. No one acted upon that before the game was declared over. Under the Constitution, your only recourse now is to either (1) seek an indictment for fraud from a prosecutor, or (2) convince a Congressperson to initiate an investigation and/or impeachment inquiry.
There was a time within which the call for objections had to be made. It was to be done before Jan 20, 2009. It wasn’t. The process didn’t happen. By what you’re saying, it’s too late now. The time when the legal process should have happened is gone so the game is over. We have no winner because the vote count was never completed.
And not one Obama supporter was able to get the election legally certified. Not one.