The problem is that the judges aren't actually supposed to give it the weight that they do. Damage, effective striking, and effective grappling are the three main criteria. Aggression and control are supposed to be tie breakers not round winners.
In the unified rules of MMA damage is not it's own criteria - although I believe when the UFC does thier little pre-fight rules thing it makes it look like one.
It's actually a sub-component of effective striking, which takes into account quality of strikes, quantity of strikes, as well as visible damage, "rocking" (stuns) and knockdowns.
This is why the judges saw the fight the way they did - GSP landed more power shots (most important sub-criteria), however condit landed more shots and they were both visibly damaged. GSP maybe a little worse for wear near rounds 4 and 5, but thankfully the fights aren't scored on what fighters look like at the end of the fight.
Judges score each round as they go. Condit looked a lot worse for the first half of the fight than GSP did. GSP would have won the "damage" category in rounds 1 and 2, probably not 3, and the others were a toss up. It was towards the end of the fight that Condit would have scored points for damage. Plus GSP dominated in every other category the entire fight.