Yes to early voting, yes to absentee ballots. From the Georgia Secretary of State web site:
November 18,2020 - Earliest day for registrar to mail an absentee ballot for the General Election Runoff for Federal Offices. O.C.G.A.§21-2-384
December14,2020 - Advanced In Person (Early) Voting begins for the General Election Runoff for Federal Offices. O.C.G.A. §21-2-385
In Georgia, if no Senate candidate gets more than 50% of the vote, then it goes to a run-off between the top two. If there are two white candidates (who would have been Democrats before the 1960s, but Republicans now) and one black, the white candidates might split the vote and the black candidate be elected with a plurality. This system ensured that one of the white candidates would eventually win.
And yet, somehow run-offs are touted as better than First-Past-the-Post.
I mean, I called this strategy over a week ago. Sow doubt and rely on Republicans in state government to find a half-legal justification to dismiss the popular vote and have a GOP legislature select electors. It’s been their strategy all along, and if they didn’t have a senile clown like Rudy running it they might have an outside shot.
There are a few better systems than run-offs but few worse than FPTP.
The Washington Post has an early analysis of the “state of the states” when it comes to who will control the decennial redistricting of House seats next year, and the news for Democrats is – not good. As the article notes, about the only positive spin they can put on it is that they’re not as brutally disadvantaged as they were after the 2010 elections.
There are some other nuggets of positive news, if you can call it that. Republicans are already so maxed out in many of the states they control that it would be functionally impossible for them to redistrict in such a way as to give themselves more seats. Even in deep red states, Republicans have to maintain majority-minority districts to comply with the Voting Rights Act. But they’ll particularly have room to add to their count in Texas, Florida and North Carolina, which are expected to gain seats and where Republican legislatures can rejigger suburban seats that have been drifting away from Republicans.
With the shrunken Democratic House majority after this election, I’d say the smart money’s on Republicans to take back the House in 2022.
Well, that’s terrible.
It’s not the voting mechanism that’s the problem, it’s the at-large district that is. In an at-large district, a majority voting bloc will always be represented (if they vote together sufficiently), while minority voting blocs will never be represented (no matter how cohesively they vote).
As an example, in California, many cities had a city council where every councilor was elected from the city at large. And every councilor would be White because Whites would predominantly vote White and thus win every seat. Lawsuits forced the cities to switch to district representation and then Blacks and Latinos could win in some districts.
Of course, districting can be abused too, as we see with gerrymandering. A party might win a small majority but have a much larger majority of seats. For example, in 2018 for the Ohio legislature, Republicans won 52% of the votes and 67% of the seats.
Proof that trump really is a supporter of American jobs like he says he is:
That’s $8 million worth of temporary employment for vote counters!
The Raw Story article says that it’ll only be a partial recount, in certain counties (John Roberts’ tweets, quoted in the article, say “several key counties”). Which means it’ll be less than the $7.9 million price tag for recounting the entire state, as well as being even less likely to flip the results in the state. But, it gives Trump more time to continue to say “we’re fighting this.” 
Maybe they’ll get their paperwork to the Wis. state courthouse by 5:04, like Kanye did…
I hope Wisconsin gets the money up front before they start the recount.
Huh. I missed the ‘partial’ in the article (I almost swear it originally didn’t say ‘partial’, but I have been known to skim). But the article does say this, maybe in error:
According to Wisconsin law, the president’s campaign is obligated to pay for the recount itself, which will cost them almost $8 million.
In fact, they’ve stated as such. “If you want the recount, you pay us right away.”
Indeed, and that’s the amount for a full recount in the state. It appears that Trump has the option to only ask for recounts in certain counties, which would be less expensive (and, obviously, less likely to move the needle, too).
And that oughta be the headline all across the country, as well as the lead on the nightly news:
Donald Trump only pays for recount in a few counties because he knows it won’t help him
or
Trump campaign doesn’t have the money for a full recount
or some such.
or
trump wastes donor money on useless recount activity that will make no difference to his failed reelection bid
PBS NewsHour ran a story last night that consisted of comments from 6-8 election officials from across the country: poll workers, county officials, secretaries of state; some partisan, some non-partisan…and they all said the same thing – that they take their work very seriously and are very proud of what they do. And unsaid but loud and clear: that they are royally pissed off at any hint that they would be involved in election rigging.
It was inspiring and restored some of my faith in our countrymen.