Perhaps, but the incumbent-victory rate in national elections is very high. I think it's about 95%. That's incredible job security. It might make sense to vote for a not-bad Republican (maybe not Paladino) just to get new blood, and replace him with a real Democrat in 2-6 years.

A consequence of the two-party system (and the lack of will of the political parties to challenge their own incumbents) is that shitty Democrats are more damaging than equally shitty Republicans, because they take up that "slot" (usually; credible primary challenges are really rare) can only be replaced by Republicans.

Getting into office is really, really hard. But once these people are in, they have a sub-5% per year chance of getting fired. That's ludicrous given that (a) positions of power should be harder to keep, and (b) their performance has been awful for the past few decades.