The Washington Post just can't stop hyping the "Republican Resurgence"

Washington Post reporter Dan Balz, in an online Q&A yesterday:

Silver Spring, Md.: I wonder if you could state the evidence for your premise of a "Republican resurgence". ...  With two unsurprising (from the vantage point of a year ago) gubernatorial results and one historical flip toward the Dems in NY, isn't it as valid to call last Tuesday a further shift leftward?

Dan Balz: I don't think I used the word "resurgence" in the piece that ran on Sunday. I do think it's fair to say they have taken some concrete steps toward the beginning of a revival. ...

The headline on the Q&A?  "The Republican Resurgence":

Balz is right: He didn't use the word "resurgence" in his Sunday article, which acknowledges problems the GOP faces:

One year after hitting bottom in the aftermath of President Obama's election, Republicans have taken their first concrete steps toward recovery. But they remain an embattled and divided force, facing an electorate still skeptical about their capacity to govern and embroiled in a struggle between party regulars and populist conservative forces over how to return to power.

...

This year, the GOP has recorded historic lows in party identification, according to a string of national surveys. And despite concerns about Obama's agenda, the public still trusts him and the Democrats over the Republicans to deal with many national problems.

The question for Republicans now is whether Tuesday's victories will prove to be aberrations or be seen as the first real signs of a party revival.

But the contrast between Balz' caution and the certainty of the title of his online Q&A is a reminder that there are plenty of people at the Post reading too much into last week's elections.