Tuesday's gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey, as well as the special election in New York's 23d district were probably the most scrutinized off-year elections in recent history.  Though the origins of this concept are unknown to me, the elections were held out by the media and pundits everywhere long before the votes were cast as a referendum on Obama and, more generally, the liberal agenda that Congress has been working on for the last year.  Did the scores of independents who elected the President into office approve of what he had done so far, or were they taken aback by the extremely leftist policies he supports?  Even if they didn't approve of the President or Congressional Democrats, would they feel that much better about a Republican party torn between moderates who are trying to expand the base and the likes of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin who are trying to increasingly polarize those on the right with their overblown demagoguery?  The results of these three elections provided some interesting insight on the political pulse of the country, but what it all means is still open to debate.

Virginia is perhaps the ideal test case for gauging the country's reaction to the Obama presidency.  The Commonwealth has been traditionally regarded as a swing state, but before Obama, no Democrat had won it in over 20 years.  Nevertheless, the Blue result last November was supposed to be a sign of things to come: Virginia was shedding its conservative roots and embracing more progressive attitudes; and if Virginia was coming around, then surely the nation as a whole must be as well.  Bob McDonnell's thumping of Creigh Deeds, as well as a Republican sweep of the other major state offices, however, quickly laid this theory to rest.  The Administration was quick to disclaim such results as based upon local issues and not indicative of the state's attitude towards the federal government (although how would they have reacted if Deeds had won?), but this is facetious at best.  If the president really thought local issues would be the decisive factor in Virginia, would he have spent so much time campaigning for Deeds?  The thought was this: people like Obama, Obama likes Deeds, therefore, people will like Deeds.  The President in all his glory smiling and shaking hands with Creigh Deeds was supposed to have all the voters swooning, still high on Obama-mania and willing to follow him like the Pied Piper wherever he might lead them.  This was a test of Obama's political clout; a test he failed.  Maybe voters elected McDonnell because they are sick of what's happening in Washington; maybe it's because McDonnell was a better candidate and ran a better campaign; in all likelihood it was a combination of these and other factors.  The take away here, though, is that Virginia showed us that all the excitement the President was able to generate last November has quickly subsided, and that simply stamping "Hope" or "Change" onto your cause is not going to be enough to carry the day.

The elections in New Jersey and the 23d District in New York provided very different insight.  Both areas usually feature one-sided fights: New Jersey is a die-hard Blue state, and the 23d district almost always elects a Republican representative.  Yet in both of these elections the tables had turned.  New Jersey elected a Republican governor, and a by-all-accounts lackluster Democratic candidate took the prize in New York.  So what does one make of these results?  It seems unlikely that the state of New Jersey has suddenly and overwhelmingly shed its liberal mindset.  Similarly, I doubt that the demographics of a region in upstate New York were that drastically different than in previous years.  Instead, I think these two elections served as warning shots across the bows of both parties.  The message was that voters aren't going to make up their minds based solely upon whether you have an "R" or a "D" next to your name.  For Republicans, the New York loss ought to have them replacing the elephant with the severed snake of colonial times: the one with the slogan "Join, or Die" underneath.  Moderate Republican Dierdre Scozzafava faced a barrage from conservative commentators for not being "conservative enough," largely due to her views on abortion and other social issues.  Scozzafava later withdrew and endorsed the Democrat rather than Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, who wound up losing.  In New Jersey, there was similar concern about a third-party candidate stealing away too many votes from an otherwise viable Republican challenger, but in this case the effect was not decisive, as Republican Chris Christie ousted Jon Corzine, who was also heavily supported by the President.

The lesson learned from New Jersey as well as Virginia for Democrats is to that they cannot rest on their laurels.  While these elections may or may not be a referendum on the course of action in Washington, they have demonstrated that the President doesn't have as much sway as he used to, which is surely a disturbing sign, as voters might actually look at substance instead of style now.  For Republicans, though the victories in Virginia and New Jersey have shown that they aren't as political defunct as some might have hoped or feared as the case may be, the loss in New York has shown them the ramifications of getting too strongly behind hyper-partisan candidates and focusing too much on social issues.  The formula for success was made apparent in Bob McDonnell's decisive victory: focus on jobs and the economy, and place the social commentary on the backburner.