Based off of one story quoting one Democrat in a DC publication, apparently, the traditional media has picked up a theme to guide their coverage of tonight’s election races: that a bad night for Democrats would cause the party to have to trim its sails on health care and climate change and a host of issues, because the nation would have rejected liberalism. The fact that “the nation” isn’t voting today, only a minor sliver of it, hasn’t disrupted this meme. Nor has the fact that the media is focusing on three races in particular – VA-Gov, NJ-Gov, and NY-23 – while neglecting a likely Democratic victory in CA-10 and a tight ballot initiative in Maine that could give pro-marriage equality forces their very first victory in a state referendum.

No, instead, the words of Jason Altmire, a Blue Dog from Pennsylvania, have become a talking point on cable news.

“It looks as though the anger that has been boiling up the last couple of months is going to lead to a pretty high turnout from Republicans and from people who are concerned about increased spending,” Altmire said Monday evening during an appearance on Fox Business Network.

“And I do think that if the results show Republicans have a pretty good night, that probably is going to lead some Democrats to think that, going into next year, we need to take a second look at the way that we’ve done a lot of bills we’ve addressed up to this point,” the Pennsylvania congressman added.

This is contradicted by an article in the very same publication today, suggesting that Nancy Pelosi has picked up votes for health care reform in recent days.

Altmire has his own agenda, of course, trying to use the election to achieve his preferred policies in health care, which would protect the interests of industry. It’s as transparent as the agenda of whatever unnamed sources leaked a higher price tag for the House health care bill to the AP.

Indeed, if there’s any unrest out there in the country, it’s coming as much from the Democratic base, which feels like they haven’t seen a lot of the change they were promised one year ago on Election Day. While some of that change is coming in drips and drabs, on major issues, the President has disappointed supporters.

To take a lesson from this that Democrats should move more toward the center is really upside-down. In a host of races across the country, Democrats who espoused moderate views are the ones most likely to be trounced today, particularly in Virginia and to a lesser extent in NY-23 (although Bill Owens in this race has offered fairly mainstream Democratic views throughout). In New Jersey, Jon Corzine has offered a proudly progressive agenda, and despite a fierce anti-incumbent sentiment and a poor economy in the state, he has a fighting chance.

The answer to “What lessons can we draw from Election 2009″ comes down to the fact that the country still feels like it’s in recession to most people, despite recent GDP growth, and people are responding the way they mostly do in such circumstances, taking it out on the party in power. This Democracy Corps poll offers the most plausible explanation:

Almost half of voters in the 60 most competitive Democratic and Republican congressional districts now rate their personal finances positively and half believe the economic recovery plan passed by Congress and signed by the president will have a positive impact. Yet, only 16 percent have a positive view of the current economy and only a third think the economy is “starting” to improve. Independents are particularly pessimistic on economic issues, with important consequences for the midterm elections.

That half in these swing (but Republican-leaning) districts believe that President Obama’s economic recovery plan could help suggests the economy could break in favor of Democrats, but the country is not ready to listen to a narrative about how Democrats have brought the economy “back from the brink” and averted an even worse disaster, as articulated by the president in his joint session address to Congress earlier this year. That leaves a lot of receptivity to Republican messages that focus on wasted spending and exploding deficits. On the other hand, focusing on the specific benefits in the stimulus package that have helped working Americans through the crisis and on rebalancing the economy so it works for the middle class (not just the wealthy) has a much bigger impact and effectively challenges the Republican narrative.

In short, the “we saved the country from depression” message isn’t resonating, but “we’re working specifically for you” message is. If the stimulus were actually of adequate size, that message could have a lot more purchase. And so thinking about how to properly return jobs to the country, how to provide tangible benefits for people, would be a lot smarter maneuver on the part of Democrats than the tired formula of moving to the right at the slightest provocation.