You may recall that it was a night of major upheavals, with two dozen new governors elected, all but a handful coming from the "out" political party. Georgia, for instance, elected its first Republican governor since the 19th century. Yet the NPR hosts kept asking me about Massachusetts, seemingly shocked that the home of the Kennedys and the only state to support George McGovern in 1972 would elect a Republican.
Clearly, they were overlooking the fact that Romney was the fourth in a line of GOP governors stretching all the way back to 1990. The state's legislature and congressional delegation are dominated by Democrats, but Bay State voters seem to like to elect Republican executives. It may be a matter of the personalities involved, or they may like having a check on the majority party.
But, as Romney found, being governor of Massachusetts is really no fit job for a Republican. All the recent ones have left prematurely, usually to seek other office, but always in frustration. Rob Gurwitt makes the reasons clear in this Governing feature; there's just an awful lot of difficulty in trying to move an agenda against an overwhelming force.
Romney found this to be so. He butted heads not just on policy issues but also with prominent Democratic personalities. He hoped voters would give him more Republican legislators to work with but instead last year they elected even more Democrats. He's since taken to traveling around the country, or at least to early caucus and primary states, bad-mouthing his own state.
Will Massachusetts voters in 2006 finally elect another Democratic governor? I guess, from this far out, I would guess so. But I won't be surprised if they decide to pin their hopes on yet another Republican.
