Well, not quite.
But the opinion piece columns in the New York Times as well as the Wall Street Journal were analyzing the results of the gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia and a few Congressional elections and it was interesting to see the contrasting conclusions that they drew from the same results.
While Obama supporters like Gail Collins and Maurren Dowd described the results as being not connected to Obama's presidency and local in nature and therefore having no bearing at all on Obama's performance or lack of it, WSJ columnist Peggy Noonan describes these results as a wake up call for the Obama White House.
It seems to me that the results might be described using that rather ungainly phrase: "anti-incumbency" factor.
That's a very popular phrase during elections in India when the voters find an outlet to show their anger at the government and throw out whoever is in power.
I think it might be the same in the U.S. as well where lobbyists have taken over the decision making process in Washington.