Why does Massachusetts vote for Republican Governers?

[South Dakota Democrat]

Statewide officials outside of Shannon O'Brien, and Deval Patrick have lower profiles than most other states. This has been happening since the death of Teddy Kennedy. Joe Kennedy III was supposed to have a higher profile to run for statewide office in the future and he cratered, early, and is confined to the house. As a result Charlie Baker is Governor.

This makes no sense.

[South Dakota Democrat]

I don’t know if people actively think the legislature is bad and they want to put a check on it.

It’s more like the conservative Republican base is so tiny here that it is possible for a moderate technocrat like Charlie Baker to run and win over most of the Indies and enough Dems to get a majority against Coakley in a terrible year for Dems, and then win re-election because he’s doing a good job and all the top tier Dems take a pass on challenging him.

Before Deval, the Dem Party was divided between conservatives and liberals, and it was easy for one group to ally with a Republican governor and tacitly support his election over the enemies they hated in the party.

Mostly it involves open-seat governor elections happening in terrible years for Dems (1994, 2002, 2014—2006 being the big exception) and then successful Republicans winning re-election as incumbents in the other midterms which are good for Dems (1998, 2018).

This.

[South Dakota Democrat]

I got to admit, I really have a disgust for democrats who vote for pigs like Baker, Hogan, Phil Scott, etc.

This surprises me.  You're so right wing that I would have thought you'd have welcomed that.

[South Dakota Democrat]

Ted Kennedy died and Coakley lost MA Sen and Gov race and gave Baker the Gov mansion. Joe Kennedy, who did want to continue Kennedy legacy was eclipsed by up start Beto, and he campaigned in 2018 Beto.

Dems will continue to win congressional races

What does Beto have to do with Joe Kennedy?  I think you're losing brain cells there, buddy.