^ Well, i understood situation right since your first post, and understand it now too. But - personally for ME moral side still prevails. Let's end the talk on this and see how it turns out... Thanks!
Don't bother feeding the troll.
In an update, it has been reported that one of the voters in the disputed election was the Democratic candidate's brother. He lives outside the district. Somehow, posters here have claimed that the Republican candidate has forfeited his moral right to object to voting fraud for reasons that, fundamentally, remain unspecified.
FWIW - it was the GOP's candidate's brother not the Dem.
Trolls don't care about their "information" being correct, they care only about "achieving their purpose"...
I stand correct. The truth matters, so you last statement is yet another strawman.
Correcting the record, the Democrat's objection is that the Republican's brother may have voted illegally, and that he believes the Republican majority might be unfair to him, while Republican's objection is that was that he was leading by six votes with four disputed ballots, until rejected ballots were counted.
In light of my correction, I would note that if the Republican won the draw, and the his brother was determined to have illegally voted for him, with no other error discovered, the Democrat, not the Republican, ought to have been seated. The forum is rife with rank partisan hypocrisy, but, that is not an excuse to presume that I am similarly inclined.
Further, supposing one of the Republican's votes is stricken, and one of the Democrat's vote is stricken, resulted again in a tie, the Democrat ought to be seated, because he won the draw, which is how Mississippi election law states how tied elections are to be settled.
The only "moral argument" against an election challenge would be if before the draw both the Democratic, and Republican candidates agreed to drop any potential challenges, and abide by the results of the draw. The Democrat wanted a rerun, while the Republican wanted a challenged. Any other "moral argument," including the one offered, is specious.