For all the complaints political pundits have regarding simplisitc thinking on the right, the pundits are the most simplisitc thinkers in the entire political realm. Over and over, one pundit after another, they blame unemployment and anti-establishment sentiment for yesterday's election returns.
Unemployment is a symptom of bad economic policies which shackle the market, and incumbents don't exist without context. The opposition to incumbents and establishment politicians is a reaction to a broken system and corruption. The voters don't care how long someone has been in office, they only care that integrity has been lost in a corrupt system.
Unemployment doesn't exist without context, either. Jobs are hard to find because government intervention has scared the hell out of businesses and they're afraid to make a move when they don't know the rules of the game and how the next intervention will affect their bottom line -- plus, government spending is sucking up capital which would could be used for private sector investment.
The public, in large part, wants a limited government which spends according to what a limited government would need to operate effectively, and they want a free market which creates opportunity and ecoomic growth. So, just saying jobs and establishment over and over misses the underlying concerns.
The pundits give the impression that if employment picks up, everything will be fine. This is not true.
This helps make my point -- http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/david-hunt/2010-05-19/riding-rand-paul-wave