Earlier this week there was talk of how President Bush, in making a last-minute appearance to support Republican Jim Kilgore in the Virginia governor’s race, “put his credibility on the line,” as the Washington Post wrote, “and ensured that the results will be interpreted as a referendum on his troubled presidency.”

So, naturally, after Democrats won gubernatorial elections last night in Virginia and New Jersey, the press set about telling us what it all means.

The good folks at ABC, however, seem to have had a harder time reading the tea leaves than others. The headline on an article on ABCNews.com asks the question: “Does the Democrats’ Big Night Mean More Success to Come?” But the subhead seems to tell a much different story: “Victories in N.J. and Virginia May Not Foreshadow 2006 Results.” And there is more paralyzing confusion to come.

The story tells us that “Kaine’s victory could make it more difficult for the president to govern by marshalling his party in the year ahead,” pointing to some daunting numbers from an ABC/Post poll showing that Americans are shying away from candidates closely associated with Bush for 2006.

But wait! “[B]efore trying to draw huge national implications from the Kaine and Corzine wins, it’s important to remember that both gubernatorial victories represent the return of the incumbent party to the statehouse,” continues ABC. “The results do not represent an upending of the status quo that definitely foreshadows trouble for the GOP in next year’s midterm elections.”

Having flipped once, ABC proceeded to flop, noting that the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee “would like you to believe otherwise.” For him, writes ABC, the Virginia victory suggests that “Democrats can run on a ‘classic’ Democratic message next year and win.” But in the next paragraph, a Republican Governors Association spokesman says the very opposite (imagine that): “It was a close race but this says nothing about any national trend. This race was run and won on Virginia issues.”

Or maybe it wasn’t. “That being said,” adds ABC, negativity surrounding Bush did spill over into the Virginia race, and a “senior Republican strategist” even “conceded to ABC News that a weakened President Bush might not hurt Republicans, but he is off the table for the moment as an asset who can help weak candidates such as Kilgore.”

Now there was something, however slight. But then came the final hedge: “However, again, strategists on both sides of the aisle should be careful about overstating that effect.”

ABC deserves some credit for trying to get past the usual media soothsaying. But if the omens are really that ambiguous, we’re left wondering why ABC was reporting on them in the first place.