There is no lack of constructive criticism, ideas, and suggestions about how Democrats should be conducting mid-term campaigns. A return to the traditional Democratic populist values and New Deal policies would be optimum to try and maintain a Democratic majority in Congress. 

But the DINOs in the White House and on Capitol Hill are busy talking out of both sides of their mouths when it comes to the plight of struggling Americans.

While voters' primary concern is jobs, the woodenheaded Democrats in Washington are fixated on the deficit, helping the GOP retain tax cuts for the super rich, and appeasing their billionaire controllers and cronies on Wall Street, the hell with Main Street.

David Mobert at In These Times writes: "Voters have not necessarily fallen in love with Republicans. They’re just deeply disappointed with Democrats.

"A strong populist message—against banks and corporate influence—could also counter the right-wing’s anti-government, populist appeal and help Democrats develop a more compelling narrative about the direction they want to take the country.

"Democrats could also promote jobs through public service work and private sector training, as Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) proposes; federal direct hiring (as in the New Deal’s Works Progress Administration); more infrastructure projects (or create an infrastructure bank); pending reauthorization of highway or clean water acts, or wage subsidies to workers who are retained at reduced hours rather than laid off.

"Perhaps little of this could pass in the upcoming short fall session, but core Democrats might feel more motivated if Congress tried. “We see a lack of enthusiasm and a sense of disappointment that the economy is still reeling with no end in sight,” AFL-CIO political director Karen Ackerman says. “It’s why people feel a sense of discouragement. Our job is to help people focus on this election as a choice and show the differences among candidates.”

“ 'The stronger Democrats are on investing and creating jobs, the stronger they will be in the election,' she says. '[Our members] have to be shown that Democrats understand them and are on their side.' "

However, despite all the talk about possible Democratic losses in the midterms, those elected Democratic officials may be much more sanguine because of the power of the incumbency.

Ken Silverstein at Harper's calls it the Democrats' best hope.

"The scenario for the midterm elections remains grim for Democrats, but they have two factors working in their favor. First, the pathetic state of the GOP and second, and more importantly, the advantages of incumbency. In American politics, it’s nearly impossible to lose a reelection race unless, to paraphrase an old line from former Louisiana politico Edwin Edwards, you’re caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.

"But just how big of an edge does incumbency offer? Take a look at the numbers (provided to me by Fair Vote):

"During the seven elections for the House between 1996 and 2008—during which a collective 3,045 seats were contested—a grand total of 89 incumbents lost their bids for reelection. The average margin of victory in House races since 2000 is about forty percent. In 2008, fifty-two candidates ran for a House seat unopposed, twice the number of highly competitive races where the margin of victory was five percent or less.

"The number of incumbents defeated since 1994 has ranged from a low of six in both 1998 and 2000, to a high of twenty-two in 2006, the year Democrats made huge overall gains won back control of the House. A number of those who lost that latter year—all Republicans — were tainted by their relationship with Jack Abramoff.

"Democrats have reaped the primary advantages of incumbency. Of incumbents who lost between 1996 and 2008, a mere twenty-one were Democrats. Nine of the losers were redistricted out of their seats and five were embroiled in scandals (like William “Dollar Bill” Jefferson of Louisiana)."