President Obama was elected in 2008 on a message of delivering hope and change. Two years later, change was delivered back to his door - change in the political landscape.

And now he has to hope for a less partisan atmosphere in Washington if he is to push through more of his agenda in the two years left before he is up for re-election.

But the situation is not as bleak as it may immediately appear.

Sitting Presidents are sitting targets during mid-term elections, particularly if the economy is tanking. It is unlikely any incumbent would have seen his party do well in the economic ruins of 2010.

And Republicans will now have to take joint responsibility for future actions, instead of obstructing and criticising past ones.

But it is the effect on foreign policy which remains unclear. Will Republicans start to pander to the more extreme wings of the Tea Party? If so, the effects could be major.

Take just one example. At this year's CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference), a straw poll was held to see who attendees would like to see as the Republican nominee for President in 2012. The top three were Ron Paul (who won by a clear majority), Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. In other words, two of the top three most popular choices were libertarians or Tea Partiers.

Ron Paul has called for NATO to be disbanded. He has called for the US to pull out of the Alliance if it does continue. And has bemoaned what he claims is a US $1trillion annual spend on global operations, saying the money should be used for other purposes.

Now, it is unlikely that we will see President Ron Paul elected President in 2012 (he has even said he is not sure if he wants to run). But for those who think this may be a passing fad, consider this: Ron Paul's Tea Partier son, Rand Paul, has just been elected to the US Senate. This tide is yet to turn.

Paul King