The obvious big winner in last night's election is Mitch McConnell. But observers see two less-obvious victors in Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie. At Vox, for example, Ezra Klein writes that "a more Democratic year could have led to some new stars who might have been able to challenge" Clinton in 2016. The GOP wave took care of that. Andrew Romano at Yahoo goes further, arguing that "almost everything" about the results—"the map, the math and the legislative morass that lies ahead in the run-up to 2016—suggests that the former first lady and secretary of state will have a better next two years than the party currently guzzling champagne." One of Romano's points is that in 2016, the Senate races up for grabs look more favorable to Democrats, which should give her an electoral boost.
As for Christie, as head of the Republican Governors' Association, he can take a big share of the credit for GOP gubernatorial candidates' great success last night. "He can now argue not only that he has personally won elections in a blue state but that he led a bunch of other Republicans to win hard elections in blue states," writes Klein. "That's going to be a powerful argument to make to Republicans in 2016." One more observation on Clinton, via Jonathan Chait at New York: Given that the GOP now controls the House and Senate, he writes that she is now "the only thing standing between a Republican Party even more radical than George W. Bush’s version and unfettered control of American government." (Read more midterm elections stories.)