Results
See also: Results of the 2008 Democratic Party presidential primariesClinton had a large initial lead as the rural precincts began reporting, leading several news groups to call the primary for her. However, Obama rallied from behind as the numbers began to come in from the heavily African American precincts in and around St. Louis to win by just under 12,000 votes. The pledged delegates were evenly split between the two candidates. Geographically, Clinton won 109 of the 115 counties in the state, while Obama carried St. Louis, Kansas City and the areas around the college towns of Columbia and Maryville.
Missouri Democratic Presidential Primary Results – 2008 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Party | Candidate | Votes | Percentage | Delegates | ||
Democratic | Barack Obama | 406,917 | 49.32% | 36 | ||
Democratic | Hillary Rodham Clinton | 395,185 | 47.90% | 36 | ||
Democratic | John Edwards | 16,736 | 2.03% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Uncommitted | 3,142 | 0.38% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Dennis Kucinich | 820 | 0.10% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Bill Richardson | 689 | 0.08% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Joe Biden | 629 | 0.08% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Mike Gravel | 438 | 0.05% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Christopher Dodd | 250 | 0.03% | 0 | ||
Democratic | Ralph Spelbring | 220 | 0.03% | 0 | ||
Totals | 827,107 | 100.00% | 72 | |||
Voter turnout | % | — |
Read more about this topic: Missouri Democratic Primary, 2008
Famous quotes containing the word results:
“The study and knowledge of the universe would somehow be lame and defective were no practical results to follow.”
—Marcus Tullius Cicero (10643 B.C.)
“Pain itself can be pleasurable accidentally in so far as it is accompanied by wonder, as in stage-plays; or in so far as it recalls a beloved object to ones memory, and makes one feel ones love for the thing, whose absence gives us pain. Consequently, since love is pleasant, both pain and whatever else results from love, in so far as they remind us of our love, are pleasant.”
—Thomas Aquinas (c. 12251274)
“Different persons growing up in the same language are like different bushes trimmed and trained to take the shape of identical elephants. The anatomical details of twigs and branches will fulfill the elephantine form differently from bush to bush, but the overall outward results are alike.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)