One of the foundational arguments that Mitt Romney supporters make for his electability is that he won in a blue state. “He has the proven ability to win in a state like Massachusetts,” Ann Coulter boasted in making the case for Romney on “Hannity.” But this claim is not very relevant to the current debate over whether he can beat President Obama.
To be sure, there are arguments you can make as to why Romney could win the presidency. But whatever arguments there are in favor of Romney’s chances of beating Obama, his 2002 victory in Massachusetts is not a good indicator, for two primary reasons. One, even though Massachusetts is a very liberal state, it isn’t unheard of for voters there to elect Republican governors. In fact, Romney’s 2002 election was the last in a a string of GOP victories in Massachusetts gubernatorial races dating back to 1990 — William Weld winning two of them and Paul Cellucci winning one. Weld was actually reelected in 1994 with 71 percent of the vote, the same year Romney lost his Senate race to Ted Kennedy by 17 points. This isn’t a knock on Romney’s performance in 1994, by the way, I’m just pointing out that it wasn’t unheard of for Massachusetts citizens to vote for Republican governors while electing Democrats by wide margins in federal races.
