That, at least, is how the failure of the Democrat Party to keep the House is being regarded by those unable to come to terms with what happened in Tuesday’s US mid-term elections. Republicans and their sibling, seen by elitists as the mad-hatters’ tea party, saw it otherwise. As did many who voted Democrat in 2008, else how could the Grand Old Party have won Barack Obama’s old senate seat in Illinois, never mind 67 seats in the House?

The winners argue it was not the audacity that did it for President Obama; it was the conclusion millions of Americans arrived at: they wanted less government, less spending, lower taxes. On each of this, they judged, the Obama Administration travelled in a diametrically opposite direction. The sheer level of government spending, it indulged itself in, prevented the slightest possibility of tax cuts and their stimulation on enterprise, consumption and growth.

The Republican Party may not have been so successful had the Tea Party candidates, thrown up almost mysteriously from the grassroots and on certain areas contemptuous of both parties, not entered the lists. These characters may turn out to be a thorn in the side of the party. For example, Marc Rubio, who took Florida off the Democrats, made it abundantly clear he will not rubber-stamp any legislation he considers hostile to the conservative values he holds and believes the Republicans compromised at times.

One should not forget, however, that the economic mess in 2008 was not of Mr Obama’s making. However, the general judgment of the American people was that he not only failed to bring America out of that mess but his management of it made it worse. It is reckoned the combined level of state debts is $134 billion and America’s total debt in the region of $15 trillion.

Nancy Pelosi, who held a press conference before the counting started and declared her party was on course to maintain its majority in the House, is no longer the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Republican John Boehner now takes her place and it will be with him and through him Mr Obama will need to negotiate any legislation the President would like to pass. And it is fairly certain that although the Democrats hung on to the Senate and Harry Reid by a wafer-thin majority, occasions will arise when Democrats in the Senate, who can read the voters’ verdict as well as the next man, may not dance to Mr Reid’s tune as had so far been the case.

There will have to be a great deal of sail-trimming on the part of the President. In fact, he expressed a willingness to compromise at his post-defeat news conference, where he described the results of the elections experience as “humbling”. Still, a Republican-dominated House risks having swathes of the legislative programme it has in mind vetoed should this be of such a nature as to humble the President still further.

One of the objectives is the repeal of the healthcare Bill. Although Mr Obama says he is ready to compromise, legislative gridlock is a distinct possibility. Many stricken Democrats are asking what prevented him doing so earlier.

Either way, he is in for a sticky time. So, by the same yardstick, is America. Many observers of the American scene are predicting the United States is entering one of its most exciting political moments in decades.