One of the battles in the war for the White House is being fought on Twitter. It's common knowledge that Obama's beating Romney hand-over-fist in followers: the president has more than 15 million followers, compared to Romney's half-million. However, the number of social followers alone doesn't mean much -- instead, the key to waging a successful political campaign on Twitter is engagement.
Along those lines, how does President Obama's Twitter presence stack up with that of Republican rival Mitt Romney? PeekAnalytics, a social audience measurement service, did some digging to find out.
[More from Mashable: 2K Games Looks Beyond Twitter, Facebook for Customer Outreach]
President Obama has more than 5,000 times the "pull," or influence, than the average Twitter account, compared to Mitt Romney at 466 times the average. That means Obama has 12 times the influence of Romney. That seems like a clear win in the Obama column -- until you consider that Obama has 30 times the followers that Romney does, meaning Romney is doing a better job of influencing his smaller audience.
[More from Mashable: Tech Has Transformed How We Find Missing Children]
Breaking down both presidential contenders' followers into demographic categories, PeekAnalytics says Obama's followers are more international (48% of Obama's followers live abroad compared to 10% for Romney), they're younger (58% are between the ages of 18-25, whereas 43% of Romney's followers are in that bracket), and female (47% for Obama, 29% for Romney) than Romney's social audience. Meanwhile, Romney's followers tend to have higher incomes (30% of Romney's followers make more than $100,000 a year, that category makes up 22% for Obama).
Can the candidates' Twitter following tell us anything about their chances come Election Day? According to PeekAnalytics, a higher percentage of Romney's followers come from crucial battleground states, save Ohio.
For more, check out PeekAnalytics' infographic below.
Do you think presidential campaigns are using Twitter effectively? Sound off in the comments below.
Disclaimer: Mashable and PeekAnalytics have a commercial relationship, but Mashable did not pay for this report.
This story originally published on Mashable here.