The exit polls are very clear and, when you think about it, it makes perfect sense. A reader writes:

How in the world can the pundits (even Megan or Marc, both of whom I like) honestly take results tonight as a referendum on Obama when:

1, Different people showed up to vote today than in 2008. It's apples to oranges to judge whether people like Obama's proposals compared to last year, when the number of young people, minorities etc voting is down. They don't like Deeds or Corzine etc but that doesn't mean they don't like Obama;

2. Governors races send winners to state office, not Washington, so the candidates do not run against Obama and Washington. Indeed, McDonnell and Christie went out of their way to avoid conflict with Obama.

3. In exit polls, people said they liked Obama at about the same rate as they did last year, and also said that these elections were not a referendum on him. How much clearer can people be?

In the end, just because pundits want to make election more significant than it is, doesn't mean it is.

Watch the pundits do the dance, led by Rove, the worst political analyst in a generation.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.