[rdcbn]

Doesn’t he mean larger? Or am I confused?

---

No it does not mean larger.

If McDaniels can demonstrate that widespread fraud or irregularities that violate election laws were present, he can demonstrate the election was fundamentally tainted.

It will be a mess and even larger numbers of crossover votes in the second election may well cause him to lose again.

The Democrats are having a wonderful time with this and the first thing that his Democrat opponent , Rep Childers did was call for a series of public debates with the mentally failing Sen Cochran

[savedbygrace]

Well, if he doesn't mean larger in that sentence, then wouldn't his opening sentence be wrong since it seems to say the opposite of the sentence I quoted above?

Sen. Thad Cochran’s second-round primary victory may be nullified if Chris McDaniel’s team can show the margin of victory was less than the number of people who wrongly voted in both Democratic and GOP primaries.

[Cboldt]

-- If McDaniels can demonstrate that widespread fraud or irregularities that violate election laws were present, he can demonstrate the election was fundamentally tainted. --

The courts will look at the numerical extent of the taint, and compare it with the margin of victory. Most elections have some amount of taint and error in them. Rejecting the outcome depends on the taint and error outweighing the victor's margin.