The Grand Old Party had an excellent night. As of now, Republicans have tightened their grip on the U.S. House, 246-181 with 8 races undetermined, and stormed the gates of the U.S. Senate, picking up at least seven seats with a good possibility of two still pending in Alaska and Louisiana (which will go to a run-off). The Republicans secured unexpected gubernatorial wins in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Illinois, and Scott Walker, from Wisconsin, is  now a front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. Against seemingly every progressive dollar, vote, and prosecutorial abuse imaginable, Walker won his third statewide election in four years.

Republicans are in a glorious mood as the vapors of victory envelop them. The party is not, as had been feared, a fetid carcass. The Democrats, meanwhile, have already polished, and inserted, their fangs. The now deposed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and his chief of staff, David Krone, wasted little time in lunging for Obama’s jugular, claiming the President was greedy with party funds and too protective of his donor lists, thereby making Democrats more vulnerable than necessary. It seems loyalty in Jefferson’s party has a new meaning. Thou shalt not slurp the blood of fellow Democrats while their bodies are still twitching. After that? Well, you gotta eat. Expect more stories to emerge, probably about the flawed candidates and the campaigns they ran. Grimes, Nunn, Landrieu, Braley, and Udall–next they’ll come for you. (Of course, Republicans are just as guilty of this when things go poorly. Anyone remember how Romney was treated after 2012?)

The temptation is, as always, to read too much into these results. The GOP has an interest in interpreting the returns as a seismic event, the beginning of a new political era. The party wants to establish this psychologically with the hope that it might become a reality. But people should be very cautious before they draw the wrong conclusions. Here’s why.

First, there are two electorates. The mid-term electorate is more amenable to Republicans. It skews older, whiter, and more engaged. The presidential electorate is more complex. It is, depending on the candidates and context, subject to the whims of personality and emotional feel-goodery. Lower information voters, who don’t care about mid-terms, engage during presidential elections. All this suggests that what we saw last night will not be replicated in 2016.

Second, voting is a crude instrument of choice and it does not translate simply into policy preferences or outcomes. Voting communicates a preference for Candidate A and/or against Candidate B. It does not necessarily imply that Candidate A’s policy ideals are superior to Candidate B’s in the minds of the electorate. Republicans today will assume that votes for their candidates last night mean more than what they do. It is hard to draw issue inferences from votes, especially when there is not a national campaign to squarely define positions. Does a vote for Joni Ernst in Iowa mean the same thing as a vote for David Perdue in Georgia? It might, but assuming it does is dangerous. Exit polls will bring some clarity, but those polls are still exclusive to state contests and are not easily nationalized since voters were still reacting to the contests in which they voted.

Third, the Republicans, while stronger, especially at the state level, still control only one branch of the federal government. Governing from the legislature is a tall task, especially when the President is not a negotiator. The Republican coalition in Congress has been, let’s be charitable and say, difficult to manage. Welding the Tea Party, Libertarian, Christian Right, Establishment, Reformist, and Constitutional fragments into a coherent caucus demands diplomacy, while the GOP of the recent past has been more interested in defenestration. If Mitch McConnell and John Boehner can manage the feat, Republicans should simply build statues and move along.

There are reasons, though, Republicans should take heart. President Obama has not been able, so far, to translate the famed Democrat ground game into contests in which he is not a candidate. Both of Obama’s mid-terms have been disastrous. 2016 will show if this is a mid-term problem or if this is a lack of Obama problem. Either way, Republicans are unlikely to find themselves shut out of power in the near future.

Also, GOP influence at the state level, which continues to bud, has positive benefits. The Republican bench gets longer and more experienced. Scott Walker, Susanna Martinez, Mike Pence, Bobby Jindal, Chris Christie, and John Kasich may all grow into formidable national figures. Perhaps more importantly, as the GOP controls state government, it also controls gerrymandering. Expect the legislative districts to further protect Republican interests in the U.S. House and in state houses. If handled correctly, Republicans, if they cement these gains in the next few cycles, might be able to build a durable legislative majority that could last for a decade or more.