Bostonist has been saying for a while that Mitt Romney, eyes firmly focused on the District of Columbia, has given up trying to please Massachusetts so as to curry favor out of state. What we've been wondering, though, is whether the conservative Republican powers that be will embrace his new-found conservatism or find it suspiciously opportunistic. Won't they look at his history here in Mass., we ask ourselves, and doubt his commitment to the cause? Maybe not: it seems like when people look at Mitt from Washington, they just don't notice his meandering ideological record here in Massachusetts. Case in point: No sooner has the Atlantic Monthly announced its departure from Boston for the warmer climes of D.C. than it produces an article that practically gushes about Romney's presidential chances.
Now, maybe we're being overly cynical, and heaven knows, writing from this bluest of states, we don't have the best insight into the workings of the political mainstream, but don't Republican power brokers prefer someone a little more dyed in the wool? After all, even Senator Arlen Specter and Justice Anthony Kennedy have lately been assailed as insufficiently conservative. The Atlantic addresses and dismisses this in short order, calling it one of Romney's two "M" problems (i.e., that he's from Massachusetts, so he must be liberal). The magazine also brushes aside the other "M" issue, based entirely on the opinion of Ted Kennedy(!), who says, essentially, that religious bias is a dead issue in this country. Bostonist hates to be the one to tell this to Ted (and Mitt), but that's just not true. Still, with national politics being largely a spectator sport for Massachusetts these days, the Atlantic article serves as a nice scorecard and program, offering some insight into how the rest of the country will see Romney as he vies for the Republican nomination.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
