The state of politics in Kansas today is interesting, if not shocking.

History shows that, over the years, Kansas has been one of the most consistently Republican states in the nation: Republican governors, Republican senators, Republican U.S. House members and a Republican-controlled state Legislature.

Today, for a variety of reasons, Republican Sen. Pat Roberts, Republican Gov. Sam Brownback, Republican Secretary of State Kris Kobach and 2nd District U.S. House incumbent Lynn Jenkins all face tough re-election battles.

What’s happened? Why the turnaround? Have Kansas’ traditional political waters changed so radically that it has given Democratic candidates a boost?

There’s no single reason, but a number of situations that, when combined, present a far different political environment and landscape. It also is puzzling when considering that Democratic President Obama today receives extremely low public approval marks and growing numbers of knowledgeable observers suggest history may rank him as one of the two or three poorest presidents in our nation’s history.

It’s puzzling because Democratic gubernatorial candidate Paul Davis, along with his running mate, Jill Docking, both were strong, active and outspoken supporters of Obama in his 2008 and 2012 election efforts. They believe in Obama and favored his plan for “fundamental changes” in America and, if elected, likely would fall in step with Obama during his last two years in office.

Do Kansans endorse the Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi political/social philosophy? Do they want their governor to mirror the Obama agenda for the next two years? The answer probably is “yes” in the eyes of a majority of Douglas County voters, but likely not for the rest of the state.

Independent/Democratic Senate candidate Greg Orman also has been a supporter and financial contributor to Obama and briefly considered running against Roberts as a Democrat in 2008.

So, what are some of the reasons for the current state of affairs in Kansas and for Roberts and Brownback?

First, there is general unrest, negative feeling, anger and frustration relative to incumbents, whether it is in our nation’s capitol or in statehouses across the country. Citizens want positive action rather than political gridlock. They are “mad as hell” or at least have lost confidence in government leaders.

Complacency. Roberts and Brownback probably entered their respective races thinking they didn’t have to worry too much about being re-elected. Roberts got a wake-up call in his primary battle, and Brownback probably thought he was running against a candidate with little name recognition or record and that Republicans would join hands to give him a second term in office.

In the case of Brownback, it is questionable whether he realized or appreciated the deep split within the state GOP, some of it due to his own actions — or lack of actions.

Roberts was hit hard by the charges he did not spend enough time in Kansas, and the matter of his real residence (Kansas or Washington, D.C.) raised troubling questions and concerns.

Also, Roberts has served as a member of the U.S. House and then Senate for 34 years. That’s a long time and offers proof that “Potomac fever” is indeed a powerful virus.

At the same time, tenure and seniority is terribly important in Congress. It cannot be overstated. Roberts enjoys both, which is a huge plus for Kansas. His voting record also is important. He opposes most of Obama’s plans for “fundamental changes” in America, as do most Kansans. They do not like the “nanny state” or growing role of the federal government fostered by Obama. Roberts is a true patriot and one of the declining number of senators who have served in the military.

Roberts’ record of achievement in Washington is impressive, very impressive, and he has represented Kansas well. Kansans know what to expect from Roberts, whereas his opponent’s values and beliefs are an unknown

As in most political elections, an incumbent has to live with his or her record, while a challenger can make all kinds of grand-sounding promises and pledges and has little or no record of past accomplishments or performance.

Few have any idea how Orman would vote because he has indicated he is likely to caucus with whichever party enjoys control of the Senate. He also makes it clear he revels in the possibility of becoming, as a masquerading independent, the deciding vote on numerous high-profile issues.

Brownback inherited a bad environment when he moved into office, as did a number of other new governors. He initiated many actions to try to improve conditions in Kansas and, in so doing, angered or disappointed some within his own party, as well as Democrats. In many instances, the record of achievements under Brownback place Kansas in the middle of national rankings.

Some efforts worked and continue to work, while some didn’t measure up to his expectations. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t, but if re-elected, he should be smart enough to modify his road map.

Brownback worked with a GOP-controlled House and Senate. If his opponent, Davis, should be elected, how will he, as an Obama follower, work with the Republican-controlled Kansas Legislature? Has Kansas changed so much that Davis will be able to push his, and Obama’s, legislative philosophy through the Legislature and onto Kansas residents?

Brownback has a record, while Davis has his voting record as a minority member of the House. So far, the public has little idea what Davis will favor and sponsor if elected or how it will impact the state and its residents.

National and state elections are only five weeks away. It is a tremendously important day for Kansas, as well as the country. Its importance cannot be overstated because it will determine the course and actions of the U.S. Senate and House, the effect of those elections on the White House, the political leadership of Kansas and the economic, fiscal and social policies and philosophy of the state’s leadership.