In the midst of all the warring interpretations of Tuesday’s elections — conservatives see the governors’ races, where millions cast their votes in both a blue and purple state, as a repudiation of Obamaism; liberals see the two House races in California and New York as proof that the president has a winning national agenda — all that really matters is the course of the Congress in the next few weeks.

If the conservative interpretation is right, then there will not be enough moderate Democratic votes to pass Obamacare and cap-and-trade — the legislators’ fear being that the electorate is now clearly angry and terrified of the drag on the economy of rising trillion-dollar-plus deficits and inept new government spending.

But if the liberal interpretation is correct, then an emboldened Democratic House majority will introduce and pass landmark health-care and cap-and-trade legislation, hoping to show Tuesday’s approving voters that Obamaism remains on track and that there are even more good things to come in 2010.

In other words, the private self interest and sense of survival of politicians and their handlers — and their ability to gauge the public mood — are probably more reliable barometers of what the Tuesday elections portended than anything observers publicly proclaim.

So we should learn what the elections meant, if anything, in the next few weeks.