Here’s an excellent analysis by Jay Cost.

And John Podhoretz has some observations (surprisingly, Joe Trippi says much the same thing):

The era of political stability for incumbents and veteran political players has truly reached its end.

The point is not that every incumbent is vulnerable — certainly Chuck Schumer isn’t — but that every incumbent might be.

The threat might come, as it did to congressional Republicans in 2006 and 2008, from Democrats taking advantage of voter exhaustion with the GOP in districts and states that should have been safe conservative territory. Or it might come, as it has over the past month, from within the incumbent’s party itself.

[NOTE: I think these anti-incumbent trends are generally good—or at least they have the chance of being good. But they are hardly inevitably good. I am reminded of this, for example.

I am reminded, also, of the fact that although backlash to Barack Obama’s presidency can be seen as contributing to and exacerbating this mood, Barack Obama’s campaign and election were early reflections of it. That is, he campaigned on a vague platform of difference (“change”) from Washington business-as-usual, as an outsider and fresh face who would offer something less corrupt and more unifying. That he has clearly failed to deliver what he promised does not change the fact that he was elected in large part because people believed him at the time (in spite of a paucity of evidence)—so great was their desire to believe.]