Obama winning by 24 in Romney's 'home' state

[_MeDotOrg]

Real Clear Politics shows the average of the polls for Massachusetts has Obama by 24 points over Romney.

That is just plain weird. I know Massachusetts is a liberal state, but I can't remember a former Governor losing his home state by that much.

[_Brackite]

I don't really care if Mitt Romney loses by that much to Barack Obama in Massachusetts. What I care about the very most of what happens in Massachusetts, if Senator Scott Brown beats that ultra-liberal loon Elizabeth Warren there.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/warr ... 14957.html

[_moksha]

Romney is winning by 60% in his 'spiritual' State of Utah.

[_MeDotOrg]

I don't really care if Mitt Romney loses by that much to Barack Obama in Massachusetts. What I care about the very most of what happens in Massachusetts, if Senator Scott Brown beats that ultra-liberal loon Elizabeth Warren there.

If you look at elections where a former Senator or Governor has lost, if they don't carry their home state they lose in a landslide. (The only modern exception I found was Gore in 2000 (lost 51-47 in Tennessee).

The only state Walter Mondale carried in '84 was Minnesota. Jimmy Carter carried Georgia by 15 when he was crushed by Reagan. Goldwater carried Arizona when he lost to Johnson in a landslide.

The biggest home state loss margin I saw was Stevenson in '56 He lost by 19, and was crushed by Eisenhower.

The point is, if you were to look at the past history of American Presidential elections and see a candidate losing his home state by 24, you would think he was going to get blown out in a landslide. I don't think anyone thinks this election is going to be a landslide.

The thing you have to ask yourself is: Who has changed? Is it the voters of Massachusetts or Mitt Romney?

[_cinepro]

Massachusetts, one of the original 13 colonies, joined the Union in February 1788, and has participated in all 56 presidential elections. The state has been reliably Democratic since 1928, but has voted Republican four times since then – twice each for Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan. Massachusetts was the only state to vote for George McGovern in his huge 1972 electoral loss to Richard Nixon. Like many northeastern states, Massachusetts slowly lost its electoral clout over the course of the 20th century. The state has lost 1/3 of its electoral votes since the 1920s, falling from 18 to 11. In 2008, Barack Obama beat John McCain 62% to 36%.

http://www.270towin.com/states/Massachusetts

It's great that Massachusetts elected a republican governor a few years ago, but it's hard for me to believe that Massachusetts going Democrat in the Presidential election is an indicator of anything.

And I'm sure George McGovern would agree with me.

[_MeDotOrg]

It's great that Massachusetts elected a republican governor a few years ago, but it's hard for me to believe that Massachusetts going Democrat in the Presidential election is an indicator of anything.

And I'm sure George McGovern would agree with me.

You're quite right that Massachusetts is a liberal state. I certainly don't think Romney's inability carry MA is a bellweather for this election. As I said, I don't think anyone thinks this election is going to be a blowout.

My point is that the Mitt Romney who was Governor of Massachusetts: pro-choice, pro gun control, pro individual mandate, is not the same man who described himself as being 'severely conservative' in the primaries. Massachusetts remained the same, Romney changed.

After tacking hard right in the primaries, he's trying to swing back to the center. He's in full Etch-A-Sketch mode.