Don't trust the Boston Globe. Skipping the obvious issues around Romney Care, the rest of his term was quite well-managed. He took over the state in dismal economic shape and made major changes to help right the situation. However, these powers were limited since he faced a veto-proof legislature, but was given strong executive powers when the budget was in deficit.
I think the biggest complaint you could make of him is that he failed to increase the number of Republican legislators, which is certainly a big negative, but was also the case for his Republican gubernatorial predecessors. The economy did take a huge nosedive during his tenure, but that was merely a reflection of its dependence on high tech, and was unavoidable.
With the Romney Care issue, I feel he is clearly a weak candidate given the GOP 2012 focus on repealing Obamacare. Obviously, there are questions regarding key Republican platform issues such as abortion. But don't call his tenure as a governor a disaster based on the reporting of an unabashedly liberal newspaper, because that just is not the case.
The economy did not take a downturn from 2003-2006, it was in fact quite robust in every state--except Mass. and Louisiana. Lousiana experienced hurricane Katrina; Mass. had not excuse.
Romney significantly raised taxes in Mass. Yea, he called them "fee increases", but if you're a small business it doesn't matter if you call it a fee or a tax, it still means you are paying more to the government.
The fact that Romney left office with only a 30% approval rating should tell you something. Even in Democratic Mass. this is extremely low for a Republican.