My conclusions:

(a) Sen. Obama benefits from a low turnout.

Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain are about tied in the %favorable-%unfavorable metric (this is the first chart, which I call the "like him-dislike him" metric).  However, Sen. Obama enjoys (or at least, he did enjoy) a substantial lead in the "love him-hate him" metric.

Thus, if voter apathy results in a low turnout, and only the highly motivated people (presumably, these are people who either love or hate one of the two candidates) show up to vote, then Sen. Obama would benefit.  

(b) Sen. McCain benefits from a high turoutn.

This point follows directly from (a).  I am highlighting it here because I have trouble believing it myself... I am sure you are sceptical of it too!!

Of course, turnout is a funny metric ~ a candidate wants high turnout amongst his supporters, and low turnout amongst the supporters of his opponent.. and it is not clear how voter apathy could affect that distribution.

(c)  Sen McCan is definitely closing the gap on the "love him-hate him" metric

As of today, the "love him-hate him" metric for the two candidates are within 1 standard deviation ~ which means that the likelihood of them being equal is >65%

On June 18, Sen. Obama's "love him-hate him" metric was substantially greater than Sen. McCain's (the difference was 3x greater than the standard deviation).

(d)  And yes, I understand the limitations of this analysis

This is a race for electoral votes, it is a state-by-state contest, one has to look for the polls in the battleground states, it is still early, Rasmussen uses automatic polling and their methods are suspect, Dewey beats Truman.. etc !!