National electoral map update: Barack Obama losing Montana to tossup

OK, here's the second weekly installment of The Ticket's ongoing Electoral Map courtesy of Karl Rove & Co.

The map, as the methodology box explains below the jump, is an average of all public telephone polls state by state within the last 30 days. States within a three-point lead for either Republican Sen. John McCain or Democrat Sen. Barack Obama are rated as tossups. From last week's map to this week's, the only significant change was the movement of Montana, with its three electoral votes, away from Obama's electoral column into the tossup category.

Also on this item's jump (click the "Read more" line to open the rest of this item) is a graph showing the electoral vote totals by week from March 3 through Aug. 6. It also reveals a steady growth starting in mid-July in the number of states considered electoral tossups. 

These maps are published in The Ticket with the permission of Karl Rove & Co. They will be a regular weekly Thursday feature here right up through election day, Nov. 4. Feel free to bookmark this page for your ready reference.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Map Methodology

For each state, the map uses the average of all public telephone polls (Internet polls are not included in the average) taken within 30 days of the most recent poll available in each state. For example, if the most recent poll in Montana was taken July 15, the average includes all polls conducted between June 15 and July 15. States within a three-point lead for McCain or Obama are classified as tossups; states outside the three-point lead are allocated to the respective candidate. There is no polling data available for the District of Columbia, but its three electoral votes are allocated to Obama.

Comments

[dave]

'i never saw a purple cow; i never hope to see one;
but I can tell you anyhow; i'd rather see than be one!'
- gelett burgess

there are less crude election maps, less polarized and more detailed, with party colors represented in shades of purple, varying from red to blue.
but anyhow: when the people look for choices, they've already been made for them. and those not wanted by the powerful - anyone who'll tell the truth, resist corruption, and offer real solutions - has been tabooed untouchable. so many people, in mortal fear of the legitimate and qualified candidates they've been misled to mistake for 'moonbats' and 'barking loons' - many will not be able to see the truth of their message, and the lies told by others.
so some will dream of a blue donkey, and others hope for a red elephant to save them, and many fail to see they'll fall again, for the same deceitful purple cow.
only when people stop to vote for political parties, or the interests of corporations and cartels, and banking dynasties, but reserve their vote for someone who will represent their own vital interests, and is accountable to them - only then can they reclaim their country, and see their rights and liberties restored.
to implement constitutional principles and values in government and politics, will guarantee true and lasting benefits for everyone.
this can best be done, by people of wisdom and integrity, such as RON PAUL.

[plankbob]

Tell me again, how come Rove is not in prison for selling toxic snake oil?

[405-598-1213]

i can't help but think that this is a nefarious trick by rove & co. (sorta like the wiretapping being a political tool by the rove/bush administration. they have no boundaries. it's come to a sorry state when nothing can be trusted.)

[Dari]

WHY is the Times publishing ANY work or ideas from a man being held in "contempt" of the United States Congress.......

The last time I checked, our Congress MAKES our laws and someone who IGNORES those laws has NO place having his opinions TOUTED in any US newspaper.

[keith]

i never saw a purple cow; i never hope to see one;
but I can tell you anyhow; i'd rather see than be one!'
- gelett burgess

Insert "Paultard" or "moRon" for "purple cow" and you have a refreshingly accurate upgrade to this merry little rhyme!

[susan]

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

[Tony Andrade]

The only solution to solve the corruption in presidential politics is to select Presidential Electors by Congressional Districts. Visit ElectoralReformCalifornia.com for details.
Today, Alcorn is using criminals in New Mexico to register voters that are not interested in the election. These voters with be bribed to vote is some cases by crack cocaine.
Let's reform and destroy the political machines.

[dave]

the implementation of the election of the president by national popular vote, as promoted by birch bayh (in), john anderson (il), tom campbell (ca) and others, would be the end of the american republic. it would transfer the powers now remaining at state level (after already having stripped the districts and local levels of their influence) to the federal government, practically reducing presidential elections, then by national popular vote, to an empty ritual or 'democratic' fig leaf, as typically seen in many de facto dictatorships, some even named 'people's republic' and the like. there would not be anything left in terms of checks and balances to counter the random nomination of any candidates by the ruling establishment. in reality, there wouldn't even be the least of democratic choice. a popular vote for either of two candidates selected and controlled by the same ruling establishment, and running for the same agenda, is worthless. there would be no accountability whatsoever. to contend that such a thing would be the constitutional thing to do, either in the interest of the people or the states, as bayh suggests, 'it's refreshing to know states have the ability under the constitution to step up and create the sensible solution americans have long been supporting,' is a brazen-faced lie. it would make constitutional principles an outmoded concept and put the constitution out of practical use altogether. there would not be much left to distinguish america from china. on the contrary, the sensible thing to do for the people to regain control over their government, is to strengthen power on state and local levels. to select presidential electors by congressional districts, as suggested in a post above, seems to be a good start. also, it might be helpful to revise illegally introduced amendments to the constitution such as the 14th amendment, and to get rid of some of the more notorious 'progressive era' amendments, the 16th amendment authorizing income tax; and the 17th amendment, replacing article I, section 3 of the constitution to the extent that it provides for the direct election of senators by the people of a state rather than their election or appointment by a state legislature. the election of state senators by popular vote, has practically further shifted the balance of power from the states to the federal government. it might also generally be a good idea to inform people how and why, presidential elections are different from a beauty queen contest.

[Mama]

Keith, you are the retarded moron. What a completely childish post.

[Jenn]

That Keith person is completely out of place here..
A child left behind?