In general, the numbers alone provided only weak evidence the Federalists had a better campaign strategy.  When I first started this project, I fully expected to see a fairly clear link between when papers were published, where they were published and when each state ratified the Constitution.  To a certain extent, Pennsylvania, Virginia and New York indicated just that and perhaps they were the ones that mattered.  They were contentious states and when Virginia and New York finally ratified, like modern, late night election coverage, everyone seemed to consider it done.

"George Washington presiding the Philadelphia Convention", Howard Chandler Christy, The Indian Reporter, 31 December 1939

“George Washington presiding the Philadelphia Convention”, Howard Chandler Christy, The Indian Reporter, 31 December 1939

Although I had a map showing geographical layout of support for the Constitution, I was unable to find enough evidence matching up delegates with those areas.  I was also surprised the convention itself was not actually as balanced as the map would indicate.

I am not completely ready to abandon the premise the Federalists won primarily through better marketing, however, the numbers alone are not enough to prove the point.  The analysis would need to include some evaluation of the content of the letters.  This would not necessarily include evaluating the content itself, but rather, looking for links between letters indicating one side was continually responding to the other, rather than leading with their own arguments.  A closer analysis of the letters, state by state would be needed as well as looking at the authors of the letters.  All or much of this data was available, I just did not have time for a useful evaluation of it.