I'll let Gail Collins provide some reality-based (if not snarky) perspective:
"We have a dramatic saga story line brewing here, and I do not want to mess it up by pointing out that Obama’s party won the only two elections that actually had anything to do with the president’s agenda. Those were the special Congressional races in California and upstate New York. But obviously they reflect only a very narrow voter sentiment, since one involved a district that was safe for the Democrats and the other a district that had not been represented by the party [Democrats] since 1872."
I know Republicans are all excited about the fact that they beat a Virginia Democrat who ran a campaign reminiscent of the 2002/2004 Terry McCauliffe-led Democrats who believed that the best way to win was to portray themselves as Republican-lite (which ultimately led to a drubbing at the polls) and that they were able to oust a New Jersey Democrat saddled with ethical problems and a Bush-like 30% approval rating, but history has shown that the party who wins the White House has lost the governorships in NJ and VA for the last twenty-odd years and those losses didn't seem to have any ill-effect on Reagan, Clinton or W. Bush. In the end, where it really mattered most for Obama and his agenda, he won. He now has two more votes in Congress.
So go ahead and crow and thump your chests, as I'm sure you guys probably need it after the last two election cycles, but I'm not sure I'd get too worked up just yet. You might want to save some of that energy just in case your forced to down some humble pie come next year. I'm just sayin'...