Ok let me get this straight. If the number of ballots recorded is off by 1 from the number of voters that were marked off, then the precinct is not allowed to be recounted?
Perhaps the workers should do a better job reconciling votes before accepting them? And why is this a problem in the predominantly Democratic precincts?
Oh, I don’t know. Maybe because the generally poor areas of Detroit don’t have enough money to properly run elections, and the state, being run by Republicans, sees no need to supplement them? 
As for the underlying law in question, I find it a bit odd that the remedy for minor errors in reconciliation of totals is to refuse to recount the results, instead letting the results of the election night stand unchallenged. I would venture a guess that it prevents someone from post-facto changing the results by making ballots go missing, so that the results on recount are changed. But that’s a guess.
The Republicans have also cobbled together a bill in lame duck (within the past day or so) to charge candidates for the full recount if they lost by more than 5 percentage points. Oh, and they’re making it retroactive for all of 2016. That seems legit. :rolleyes:
This, combined with the state’s attorney general recently lashing out at the judge who allowed the recount to proceed, makes me wonder why this party that alleges such widespread voter fraud is so scared of a presidential recount in a state that was won by less than 10,000 votes, or 0.2%.
Detroit ought to raise a little money via taxes in order to provide essential services?
Are we talking about Detroit, Michigan? The city that was recently bankrupt because it couldn’t raise enough revenue to pay its debts? The city that was overseen by an appointee of the Republican Governor, as a deal that got the city special legislation helping it deal with its bankruptcy? THAT Detroit??
Goodness, why not just raise taxes. That will surely work. :smack:
In octopus’ defense, he probably just assumed you were blindly in favour of tax increases like everyone else who ever disagreed with him.
Just kidding! 