If Mitt Romney is bipartisan...

...then why do the residents of Massachusetts, the state where he was governor of, dislike him so much?

He's down anywhere between 17 and 32 percentage points, depending upon the poll.

It could be that Massachusettians are partisan liberals, but then if that were true, I would think that Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren would not have the rough and tumble fight that they're having right now.

"If we didn't override every one of his vetoes, we overrode most of his vetoes. … There wasn't a bipartisan effort to run government."  So said former State Representative Dan Bosley.

So what were they vetoing?  Cuts to programs for:

• veterans;
• disadvantaged children;
• adults with severe physical disabilities;
• breast, cervical and prostate cancer screenings;
• suicide prevention;
• aid to the blind and the deaf.

All totaled, those cuts would have amounted to less than 2.5% of Massachusetts' budget deficit, but would have hit the poor and the lower middle-class disproportionately hard.

So it's no surprise then, that when Mitt Romney tried to obfuscate the pain and suffering from moving Medicare to a defined contribution plan with capped payouts, privatizing FEMA and cutting funding to the arts and public broadcasting, most Massachusettians already knew the score.

This man is no centrist and he's most certainly not bipartisan; he couldn't put three words together to say that he supported he Lilly Ledbetter Act, because he doesn't actually support a law that establishes equal pay for women.