It always mystified me that Massachusetts, the only state to vote for McGovern in 1972, voted twice for Ronald Reagan.
Granted, it was generally the weakest state that he carried, receiving just under 41% of the vote in the 3-way 1980 race, and 51% of the vote in 1984.
But it still makes me wonder. Is it because the Massachusetts liberalism was centered on anti-war views, and that once that issue was removed there was less incentive to vote Democratic? Any ideas?
Mass. is largly Catholic, economicly liberal, not very pro-war, but not all that socially liberal. Regan gathered some Catholic anti-abortion votes, and Carter had done poorly.
This certainly isn't true. Massachusetts was not exactly the bastion of social liberalism at the time; that title went to Minnesota in the 1980s. Still, Reagan won Massachusetts on economic policies, not social ones, and on party loyalty and the North-South divide. 1980 was the last election in which the Democrats represented the South and the Republicans the North (or at least the Union), and Reagan was just moderate enough on economics to convince both sides of the Massachusetts economic spectrum to vote for him. (Catholic distrust of southerners helped.)
McGovern did well in Massachusetts at least partially because of his name.
Finally, as Gustaf points out, Massachusetts still voted more for Carter than the average state in 1980.
