I don't think that the base closures are political in nature, but when somone is appealing one, then I would assume and know that if it was me that I would tend to be more sympathetic towards people who actually vote with me than to those who consistently knife me in the back!
Just the nature of the situation. Costs in Maine for the military may be to high to be practical. It's hard to say. I can't imagine that anyone that is losing a base is happy about it. But someone has to lose. Indiana went to Bush approching 70% and we still lost some bases, but over all did pretty well. So if it were all politics, we should not have lost anything! IMO
The bases made sense, militarily, at some point. Brunswick does anti-submarine patrol off the coast; Loring had B-52's IIRC, Kittery is a nuclear refeuling station. Not a military base, but Bath Iron Works makes all sorts of ships. Cranked out 1 Liberty ship per week during WWII. But times change, and with that comes changing needs. Some capabilities that were essential in the past are felt less important today.
I don't think it is "cost of the location" per se. Maine isn't that expensive. Cheaper than Connecticut, for example. Locating military capability is a complex choice, with lots of variables.
Anyhow, we agree on the principle that politics should be tangential to base decisions, and base decisions should be tangential to unrelated political votes in Congress. Pique and spite are child's tools, not adult's tools.