good questions .... of course I think the GOP has to go to court to challenge the results and ... we will see what the judge decides ...
It seems clear based on CT recent cases that they will revote ... I assume DEM #1 is declared a winner and the revote will include only 2nd and 3rd place finishers.
But will they revote in all 3 voting places or only in the ONE affected spot? Can we assume that turnout will be lower in the revote? If yes ... GOP has advantage cuz the bad votes were in the heavy DEM district.
The fourth-place finisher (R) is less than 17 votes away from third place, but more than 17 votes away from second place (which is the spot that would get him elected), so I would order a revote just between the second- and third-place finishers (one D and one R). If the judge somehow rules that the fourth-place finisher has the right to participate in the revote, then the only fair way would be if the first-place finisher also has to run again, with each voter getting to vote for 2 just as on election day; otherwise, with 2 Rs and 1 D and voters only being able to choose 1, the D surely will win.
As for whether to revote just in the one voting place where the screw-up took place or in all three voting places ... I think they’d have to revote in all three to avoid an equal-protection problem. And I wouldn’t be too sure that the revote in the heavily Dem voting place would see lower turnout: sure, revotes and runoffs almost always see lower turnout, but in a situation in which the RAT knows for sure that just a few votes will get him elected you can be sure that he’ll scour the neighborhood offering packs of cigarettes to voters.