In all honestly, with the current system in place; no.
All votes don't actually count. You could be in a state that has 20 million people. 19 million could vote for candidate A and candidate B could only get the remainder. That doesn't mean that A has 19 million votes though, not really.
He's only credited for having what electoral points are designated for that state.
Example:
You could have four states. State 1, 2, 3 and 4.
States 1 and 2 could have ten people each. State 3 could have 21 people. State 4 could have 5 people.
Now, if candidate A wins states 1, 2, and 4, his overall votes would equate to 25 votes. (Assuming that the entire state votes in one or the other direction for simplification.)
Candidate B could only win state 3 and receive 21 votes in total.
Now, in a fair election, A is the winner, with a margin of 4. However, the states don't count that way. They count with electoral points. States 1, 2 and 4 could only equal 5 electoral points each (15 points). Whereas, state 3 could have an electoral worth of 16 points.
Meaning that the man with less states and the man with less votes could win the entire Presidential election.
Far-fetched? Not really.
George Bush won the election against Al Gore, becoming president, while losing the popular vote. Meaning that, even though Gore won more overall votes, Bush won due to electoral points.
Show the other side of that. The race between Bush and John Kerry came down to Ohio. However, even if Kerry had won Ohio, he'd have most likely ended up with less overall votes than Bush.