Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections - Data Graphs

Note: The Google advertisement links below may advocate political positions that this site does not endorse.

Data for this Contest was Contributed by on 2008-05-07

Map

Map

Alamance	Goodwin	49.1%
	Smith	50.9%

Alexander	Goodwin	57.4%
	Smith	42.6%

Alleghany	Goodwin	52.9%
	Smith	47.1%

Anson	Goodwin	68.7%
	Smith	31.3%

Ashe	Goodwin	54.5%
	Smith	45.5%

Avery	Goodwin	37.6%
	Smith	62.4%

Beaufort	Goodwin	49.3%
	Smith	50.7%

Bertie	Goodwin	62.7%
	Smith	37.3%

Bladen	Goodwin	36.7%
	Smith	63.3%

Brunswick	Goodwin	50.2%
	Smith	49.8%

Buncombe	Goodwin	53.4%
	Smith	46.6%

Burke	Goodwin	47.2%
	Smith	52.8%

Cabarrus	Goodwin	51.6%
	Smith	48.4%

Caldwell	Goodwin	45.5%
	Smith	54.5%

Camden	Goodwin	68.6%
	Smith	31.4%

Carteret	Goodwin	56.1%
	Smith	43.9%

Caswell	Goodwin	49.7%
	Smith	50.3%

Catawba	Goodwin	48.1%
	Smith	51.9%

Chatham	Goodwin	61.0%
	Smith	39.0%

Cherokee	Goodwin	55.8%
	Smith	44.2%

Chowan	Goodwin	76.1%
	Smith	23.9%

Clay	Goodwin	53.8%
	Smith	46.2%

Cleveland	Goodwin	48.1%
	Smith	51.9%

Columbus	Goodwin	57.1%
	Smith	42.9%

Craven	Goodwin	58.4%
	Smith	41.6%

Cumberland	Goodwin	50.8%
	Smith	49.2%

Currituck	Goodwin	59.6%
	Smith	40.4%

Dare	Goodwin	54.7%
	Smith	45.3%

Davidson	Goodwin	44.8%
	Smith	55.2%

Davie	Goodwin	51.7%
	Smith	48.3%

Duplin	Goodwin	55.5%
	Smith	44.5%

Durham	Goodwin	66.9%
	Smith	33.1%

Edgecombe	Goodwin	71.3%
	Smith	28.7%

Forsyth	Goodwin	60.1%
	Smith	39.9%

Franklin	Goodwin	54.9%
	Smith	45.1%

Gaston	Goodwin	46.9%
	Smith	53.1%

Gates	Goodwin	66.2%
	Smith	33.8%

Graham	Goodwin	41.2%
	Smith	58.8%

Granville	Goodwin	41.6%
	Smith	58.4%

Greene	Goodwin	51.7%
	Smith	48.3%

Guilford	Goodwin	50.3%
	Smith	49.7%

Halifax	Goodwin	61.3%
	Smith	38.7%

Harnett	Goodwin	51.8%
	Smith	48.2%

Haywood	Goodwin	49.1%
	Smith	50.9%

Henderson	Goodwin	53.8%
	Smith	46.2%

Hertford	Goodwin	59.7%
	Smith	40.3%

Hoke	Goodwin	46.0%
	Smith	54.0%

Hyde	Goodwin	52.8%
	Smith	47.2%

Iredell	Goodwin	50.2%
	Smith	49.8%

Jackson	Goodwin	52.8%
	Smith	47.2%

Johnston	Goodwin	53.0%
	Smith	47.0%

Jones	Goodwin	63.1%
	Smith	36.9%

Lee	Goodwin	54.3%
	Smith	45.7%

Lenoir	Goodwin	56.1%
	Smith	43.9%

Lincoln	Goodwin	49.3%
	Smith	50.7%

McDowell	Goodwin	45.9%
	Smith	54.1%

Macon	Goodwin	53.4%
	Smith	46.6%

Madison	Goodwin	53.1%
	Smith	46.9%

Martin	Goodwin	64.5%
	Smith	35.5%

Mecklenburg	Goodwin	62.3%
	Smith	37.7%

Mitchell	Goodwin	45.7%
	Smith	54.3%

Montgomery	Goodwin	71.8%
	Smith	28.2%

Moore	Goodwin	56.3%
	Smith	43.7%

Nash	Goodwin	56.9%
	Smith	43.1%

New Hanover	Goodwin	54.3%
	Smith	45.7%

Northampton	Goodwin	72.4%
	Smith	27.6%

Onslow	Goodwin	51.7%
	Smith	48.3%

Orange	Goodwin	65.3%
	Smith	34.7%

Pamlico	Goodwin	61.0%
	Smith	39.0%

Pasquotank	Goodwin	63.2%
	Smith	36.8%

Pender	Goodwin	55.6%
	Smith	44.4%

Perquimans	Goodwin	69.7%
	Smith	30.3%

Person	Goodwin	55.2%
	Smith	44.8%

Pitt	Goodwin	49.8%
	Smith	50.2%

Polk	Goodwin	54.4%
	Smith	45.6%

Randolph	Goodwin	46.5%
	Smith	53.5%

Richmond	Goodwin	83.5%
	Smith	16.5%

Robeson	Goodwin	43.0%
	Smith	57.0%

Rockingham	Goodwin	47.3%
	Smith	52.7%

Rowan	Goodwin	49.4%
	Smith	50.6%

Rutherford	Goodwin	47.5%
	Smith	52.5%

Sampson	Goodwin	49.1%
	Smith	50.9%

Scotland	Goodwin	72.3%
	Smith	27.7%

Stanly	Goodwin	53.3%
	Smith	46.7%

Stokes	Goodwin	46.3%
	Smith	53.7%

Surry	Goodwin	52.1%
	Smith	47.9%

Swain	Goodwin	49.9%
	Smith	50.1%

Transylvania	Goodwin	52.0%
	Smith	48.0%

Tyrrell	Goodwin	51.3%
	Smith	48.7%

Union	Goodwin	56.7%
	Smith	43.3%

Vance	Goodwin	52.7%
	Smith	47.3%

Wake	Goodwin	62.8%
	Smith	37.2%

Warren	Goodwin	37.5%
	Smith	62.5%

Washington	Goodwin	68.3%
	Smith	31.7%

Watauga	Goodwin	58.3%
	Smith	41.7%

Wayne	Goodwin	56.2%
	Smith	43.8%

Wilkes	Goodwin	51.2%
	Smith	48.8%

Wilson	Goodwin	54.5%
	Smith	45.5%

Yadkin	Goodwin	48.5%
	Smith	51.5%

Yancey	Goodwin	54.0%
	Smith	46.0%

National DataGraph for 2008 - North Carolina Results for 2008

Login

Terms of Use - DCMA Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC 2019 All Rights Reserved