I did say "perhaps" Montana, based largely on the facts that they elected a Democratic senator last year, and that it was one of the western states Clinton carried in '92. Obviously it would be the longest shot of all the states where the Dems have any chance at all, and everything would have to fall into place for them to carry it.
Clinton only carried it because of Perot.
I really don't think that's true, considering Dukakis came within only 6 points of carrying it in 1988. Now granted, it was trending Republican in the 90's, but I don't think it would've trended Republican fast enough to go from being a Democratic leaning state in 1988 to a pretty strongly Republican leaning one in 1992.
Montana also historically has an anti-incumbent streak; along with the Dakotas it might be the most anti-incumbent state in the nation overall. This helped Perot in 1992 most of all of course, but also benefited Clinton and would've likely resulted in a larger than normal percentage of Perot's voters going to Clinton.
