And they don't see any other political family attaining the charismatic power and the political legacy that the Kennedy name has come to mean over the last 50 years.
"Ted's passing is certainly the end of an era," said Thomas Maier, the author of book "The Kennedy's: America's Emerald Kings."
"He was part of a very special family," Maier said. "It was just a remarkable group of people who had great talents and found themselves in a very special place in history... And so with his death, that dynasty has come to an end."
After more than four decades in the Senate, to which he was first elected in 1962 at the age of 30, political science experts say that it's unlikely anyone will be able to sustain the family's name to the degree Kennedy did.
"He was the baby of the family and he was always a natural extension of the type of ambitions and idealism that the Kennedy's had," said Maier of Kennedy, who was the ninth child born to Joe and Rose Kennedy in 1932.
Tom Whalen, a professor of politics at Boston University, is skeptical that anyone could fill the void left in Kennedy's wake.
"He was the last link to Camelot," said Whalen. "His death will likely mean the end of the Kennedy line in politics for the immediate future. I don't see anyone picking up the torch."
According to Whalen, Kennedy's death and the end of the Kennedy dynasty could mean the end of political lineages in the nation altogether.
"Frankly, we might be moving into a new era in American politics where people have grown tired of the dynasties," said Whalen.
The George W. Bush administration, says Whalen, made Americans wary of "automatically voting for someone just because they have a familiar brand name in politics."
"I think the state of the electorate has changed, people are a bit more cynical about dynasties like the Kennedy's especially since the Bush years," said Whalen.
"They realize now that just because someone's father was a great politician doesn't necessary mean their son or daughter will be the same," said Whalen.
Will Swift, the author of the 2008 book "The Kennedy's Amidst the Gathering Storm," said that he considers there to have been four great, political dynasties over the past 200 years: the Adams, the Roosevelts, the Kennedys and the Bushes. None of them, he says, can compare to the Kennedys.
A family like the Bush's is unlikely to meet the expectations of a true dynasty set forth by the Kennedys, according to Allan Lichtman, an American history professor at American University in Washington, D.C.
"The Bush family won't become the next Kennedy family because the last administration has been so discredited," said Lichtman. "I don't think 20 or 30 years from now we'll remember the Bush administration as the second coming of Camelot."
"There were so many what ifs about the Kennedys and no what ifs about the Bush's," said Lichtman. "Nor does there seem to be another generation of Bush's ready to take on important political roles."