What if Bill Weld ran against Ted Kennedy in 1994?

What if Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld had run against Ted Kennedy in his 1994 Senate race, rather than Mitt Romney going against Kennedy and Weld running against John Kerry in 1996? This article suggests he would have had a better chance against Kennedy, though it was written before the results of the 1996 race.
Ted Kennedy, in short, was achingly vulnerable in 1994. As late as September his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, a Mormon venture capitalist running for elective office for the first time, and Kennedy were in a dead heat in the polls. But Romney had never before had "the deep frisk," which is the political strategist John Sasso's way of saying that he had never been pawed over by the press. In due course the deep frisk turned up workers who had been hurt by Romney's venture capitalism. And Kennedy, in a family first, attacked Romney in negative ads. In the event, Kennedy won by a misleadingly swollen margin of 17 percent.

BILL Weld, through all this, was engaging in a meaningless (and mean) re-election campaign. He had popularity to burn in 1994. Elected narrowly in 1990 against John Silber, the president of Boston University, a Democrat who gave the inconvenient impression of being only fitfully sane, Weld had worn well in office. He did not take himself seriously. He was known to lift the convivial glass. Rich, well-born, married to a descendant of Theodore Roosevelt, a WASP in one of the most Catholic states in the country, Weld got credit for being, despite everything, a regular guy. Hell, he hunted boar. But instead of using his political capital to take on Ted Kennedy, Weld chose to run up the score against state representative Mark Roosevelt, who carried only two of the Commonwealth's 351 cities and towns.

Had Weld run against Kennedy and won, as polls suggest he would have, he might well have been a presidential candidate in this year's Republican primaries. Beating Kennedy would have trumped any complaints the Republican right has against Weld. Against old Bob Dole, Weld would have shone as the fresh face of 1996, the opportunity candidate, the tax-cutting candidate, a self-confessed "filthy supply-sider."

In 1994, Kennedy won by 17.1% as Republicans won by 6.8% nationwide, so Massachusetts voted 23.9% to the left of the nation. In 1996, Kerry won by 7.5% as the House popular vote(the common indicator for both years, and Clinton's margin was bolstered by him being a superior candidate to Dole) was even, so Massachusetts voted 7.5% to the left of the nation. That is a 16.4% difference in the state's lean in those two races, and so rather roughly could be seen as the candidate quality gap between Weld and Romney. Take away 16.4% from Kennedy's margin in 1994 and he wins by only 0.7%, which could easily end up barely the other way with a narrow Weld win. So what would be the results of Weld winning in 1994? Would he run for President in 1996 or 2000, and if so would he be able to win the GOP nomination? If not, what other impact would he have on those presidential cycles? As for Romney, would he still run for the Massachusetts governorship-or be successful(perhaps his vulnerabilities come to light then and cause him to lose)? Maybe he'd run in Utah instead(which might be better for his future presidential ambitions)? What other impacts would this have on US politics? What if?
Not sure, this seems like it could be an interesting timeline. If Weld wins the senate election, I see him staying as a Republican, and not joining the Libertarian Party. I also see him winning in 2000, and then loosing in 2006 to maybe Kennedy again? Deval Patrick? I could also see him trying for the presidency in 2008 then.