Not as legitimate as you might think, Dave.  There was a LOT of backroom dealing that led to the results being reported as such.  The only statistically legitimate pre-poll had sentiment closer to 60-40 against (in Venezuela).  My father-in-law has friends VERY well connected with the government, and they tacitly confirmed that the 51-49 report was more of a face-saving measure.  Chavez knew, given the reality of sentiment against these measures, that a real election fix would lead to a military coup.  Since Chavez appointees control the CNE (election committee) and the courts, they could have and would have fully rigged the result had it not been for the military's refusal to go along with the charade.   

No doubt its nice to see an election come off and the government respect the result, but there is still the issue of how some of these items ever came up for a mere popular vote.  I really have to wonder if a straight referendum on all issues, especially constitutional ones, is a good idea.  Just look at all the bugetary gridlock in California to see the results.

Among other things, the Venezuelans were looking at some spectacularly bad ideas including:

1) Erosion of property rights, creation of more communal properties AT THE DISCRETION of the executive

2)  Executive rather than independent control of the central bank

3)  The much discussed term limits issue

4)  Federal control of redrawing state and local political boundaries. 

These are some of the worst of ideas that even if not immediate failures would have put the executive in a position to absolutely dominate the country for years to come.  It was, in effect, an attempt at a legal dictatorship. 

None of this, of course, excuses any of the problems we have in the USA, which are independent of the Venezuelan ones.  But I"ll say this, we are a lot closer to getting our problems solved than they are theirs.