Good tabulation. And good to see McCain so cornered.

I'm not so sure about Montana being that hopeless. Evidence is just anecdotal, but I was there last week, and I saw an awful lot of Obama bnumper stickers on cars with MT plates (saw no McCain bumper stickers there, but then again, I haven't seen one anywhere). I talked to a lot of people who were very open to Obama, even if still undecided.

In what recent election has Oregon not ben in play?

Nate Silver pointed out that McCain doesn't even have an Indiana Field office.
If Even Bayh is the VP that state could really start to swing and force McCain to start playing defense.  
Do ads on MI TV go into Indiana?

McCain is already trying defending places like Virginia & North Carolina.  If those polls stay close, that could be a huge drain on McCain.
I wish Obama would not be on vacation now in Haiwii.  That is stupid, stupid STUPID.  Can't that wait until Nov 5th?  We don't need to see pictures of him frolicking on sun dappled beaches right now.
I would rather him be in North Carolina and Virginia for about 1 month hitting every local outlet than going to MI.

Increasingly, I'm hearing that OR, WA, and NJ are pretty much being written off (as you allude).  I think the GOP has started to realize that contesting them would be a waste (sucks for us, I guess... would have preferred to see McCain and the GOP waste resources).

In OR, Gordon Smith is actually running a campaign that embraces Obama!

As to the rest?

Well, I think WI is a fool's errand for McCain - and while MI seems like a Great Lakes outlier at the moment, I think that's really a lingering function of it not getting any face time during the primary.  I think Obama also gets hurt, ironically, by MI's blue state level government -- I suspect he'll have a tougher time running as the 'opposition' candidate there.  I just hope whatever machine/infrastructure the Dem controlled state provides can overcome that.

In fact, I think one aspect of Obama's campaign/strength that has been overlooked, and really, not emphasized to the degree that I would, is Obama's midwestern geography.  I think it's clear that he's getting bumps in MO, IA, IN, and WI because of the proximity to Illinois, but I'm just not seeing the campaign focusing much attention on this.  

Perhaps that's because the campaign truly DOES want to run a 50 state strategy and expand the map -- and employing any sort of regional focus contradicts that, but I really do believe that Obama could seal this election by hitting the midwest with a full bore "I'm one of you" message.   If he were to do this, I think he can flip MO and IN, and make OH less of a contest -- though, like PA, OH is really several states wrapped in one.

It's been one heck of a long time since the Midwest had a player in the Presidential race (Adlai Stevenson?) -- and I think provincialism would really play well here... but perhaps doing so hurts Obama in the mid-atlantic and western states he's targeting.

stronghold this early out.

VA is a much tougher deal to close than, say, Iowa.

A good thing about Obama running ads in Georgia is to help out Jim Martin.  I have a feeling that if the Senate race starts to show itself to be somewhat close (within 8 points or so) McCain and the GOP will start to spend money here.

It really would just be the Atlanta market since over 50% of the state lives in the Atlanta TV market, but there has to be some worry about the purpling of the suburbs.

McCain still thinks he can win the state--hence his two days there next week.

If Obama loses PA, he's lost the election by 4-5%.

The real issue is not how well Obama or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn't have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote -- that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

Because of state-by-state enacted rules for winner-take-all awarding of their electoral votes, recent candidates with limited funds have concentrated their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. In 2004 two-thirds of the visits and money were focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money went to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential election.

Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.

The National Popular Vote bill has passed 21 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and both houses in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These four states possess 50 electoral votes -- 19% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com  
susan