Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
AMAZINGLY CLOSE...50.2% TO 49.8%
Using CNN's reported results , and rounding to the nearest thousand (both when inputing the numbers into my speadsheet and in the totals)--and noting that there still some votes still to be counted in New Mexico, not that it will upset the overall result to report here--I have a preliminary total of 7.35M votes yesterday for Hillary Clinton and 7.29 for Barack Obama.
Overall, a total vote margin of about 65K despite nearly 15 million total votes cast for one or the other. Ignoring all other stray votes, that gives her 50.2 percent of the two-candidate vote share and him the balance, 49.8 percent.
Stunning, really.
And yet, he may win both more states and, by a marginal handful, more delegates. That's just how close it was.
--Tom Schaller
COMMENTS (5)
so wasn't it just under a week ago, tom, that you noted that obama did really well in the states in which he competed whereas clinton only did well in the states like florida?
your sample seemed a little small then, and in the face of this larger data set, i'd say your tentative conclusion was...wrong.
i have no dog in this fight - i'm not crazy about clintons and bushes in the white house forever, so on that level, i oppose clinton, but i'm going to vote for whichever one wins the nomination, no questions asked - but it appears that dems are honestly torn between two good candidates.
Posted by: howard | February 6, 2008 12:40 PM
Does this estimate, average, the caucus states? Are caucus states included in the average?
Posted by: JC | February 6, 2008 12:56 PM
Actually, Howard, this seems to bear out that analysis, given how little time Obama had to compete in these states, but how much he rocketed up in them in that little time. Given a couple more weeks, I'm not sure he doesn't win everywhere but NY, NJ, AR & OK
They really scrambled with the latin vote in places like AZ, NM, and Cali at the end, barely courted it at all, and literally did not once go to Tennessee.
Posted by: Michael | February 6, 2008 12:59 PM
I'll echo the concern about caucases. Obama swept the caucases, so mis-counting them could distort the result.
Posted by: tom veil | February 6, 2008 12:59 PM
Well, I was doing the primary math last night, and it looked like the differences were gonna be minor between the two just in primaries...roughly 1-3%
Also, why not add in Iowa, NH, Nevada, SC, where we have vote totals? 26 states have been campaigned in and subsequently registered their preferences...I'd like to see those totals
Posted by: Michael | February 6, 2008 1:06 PM