Question about runoffs

[solarstorm]

As we all know, Georgia and Louisiana hold runoffs if the winner of the primary (official term, btw?) has only received a plurality of the vote.

What happens if the primary winner's result is so close to 50% that it will remain unclear for weeks if they have won the election in the first round?

As we all know that American election workers don't count that fast and conscientiously - Dave always has to edit his result collections even months after elections - it could lead to problems.

Will a runoff take place by default in case the result isn't clear enough? And what happens if it comes apparent afterwards that the runoff wasn't necessary (with the opponent winning this runoff)? Or if a runoff should have been implemented?

[Barnes]

The general election (Nov. 4) is not referred to as a primary in Georgia - that's only a Louisiana thing.

That's certainly an interesting scenario, but the vast majority of votes are done being counted by the end of the week - usually, even if every uncounted ballot broke to the leading candidate, it still wouldn't put them over the top.

That's how it happens in Georgia, usually.  Of course, there could always be a possibility of it being extremely close, but I think that's better left to the fantasy storylines on here.

[solarstorm]

I think it is not unrealistic that Nunn wins the first round with 49.999% or 50.001%.