What the heck? The Washington Post reports:

Democrats are making increasingly explicit threats about their willingness to let nearly $600 billion worth of tax hikes and spending cuts take effect in January unless Republicans drop their opposition to higher taxes for the nation’s wealthiest households. Emboldened by signs that GOP resistance to new taxes may be weakening, senior Democrats say they are prepared to weather a fiscal event that could plunge the nation back into recession if the new year arrives without an acceptable compromise.

And this from the party led by the man who called his opponents “hostage takers.”

In the final days of the 2008 campaign, the conservative press/blogosphere were buzzing about Jeremiah Wright/Bill Ayers/Bernardine Dohrn and other signs of a radical past of then-Senator Obama, while the John McCain campaign was running “dedicated to a cause bigger than my own” biographical ads and the RNC was running fairly generic “Obama is inexperienced” ads.

There were times when the Venn diagram of the conservative grassroots and the GOP establishment overlapped more, but for much of that cycle, the two groups were singing from a different songbook.

In 2012, you’re seeing much greater message alignment between the conservative press/blogosphere and the campaigns and committees.

For example, among conservative blogs, the term “the Obama administration is pivoting to jobs” spurs eye-rolls and snickers. Last year I wrote:

Pivoting: A Form of Rotation Similar to Tilting at a Windmill

Ben Smith of Politico contemplates the Obama administration’s perennial pivot: “Mike Allen’s note this morning that ‘Dems plan pivot to jobs’ sounded awfully familiar to me, as it apparently did to the Republican National Committee, which promptly turned out a list of 15 occasions on which the White House had allegedly announced a similar pivot. That number is, shockingly, a bit inflated, but the underlying truth of the presidency is that through a mixture of choice — health care — and circumstance — the Arab Spring, the Japan earthquake — Obama has spent very little of his presidency publicly driving a conversation about jobs. By far the most serious jobs legislation he passes was the stimulus, but over-optimistic forecasts and implacable Republican opposition put the White House sharply on defense about it almost from the start. And the story of the Administration is, in no small part, one of a constant attempt to pivot formally to jobs. Emily and I identified what seem like six really attempts at it, with the seventh starting now . . .”

Keep in mind that inherent in the pivot-point talking point is an inherent excuse: The reason the administration hasn’t seen much success in bringing down the unemployment rate, or is perceived to be useless in bringing down the unemployment rate, or hasn’t communicated its message about its efforts, is always a lack of time and focus. I think most of us would argue the problem isn’t really an administrative attention deficit disorder or chronic focus on other issues; the problem is the policies stink.

Too much of the stimulus money got spent on crap. It allowed states to put off fiscal reckoning between runaway expenditures and vastly overestimated tax revenues. Trade deals have collected dust for years while Obama’s team tries to find ways to placate unions. Fancy regulation-reduction panels are announced while the Federal Register grows thicker and thicker. Obamacare adds a whole new complicating variable into employer health-care plans.

“All right, now we’re really going to pivot to jobs, just you wait and see” sounds like the oft-heard pledges of dieting and exercise and saving money and cleaning out the basement and flossing; the idea that all it’s going to take is a bit more attention to the problem and it’s going to be solved. I don’t doubt that a lot of folks in the White House are worried about the unemployment rate. I just don’t have any faith that they have any real ideas to improve the situation.

This morning, the RNC unveils this ad:

Hard to imagine the Romney campaign wouldn’t hit the president on this point, as well.

President Obama, speaking at a DNC fundraiser in Philadelphia, Pa. last night:

  Now, let me tell you why I thought it was so important to run — even though Michelle, she wasn’t so sure.  (Laughter.)  And why you guys got involved.  I just want everybody to remember.  We ran because we believed in an economy that didn’t just work for those at the top, but worked for everybody — where prosperity was shared, from the machinist on the line, to the manager on the floor, to the CEO in the boardroom.          We ran because we believed our success isn’t just determined by stock prices and corporate profits, but by whether ordinary folks can find a good job that pays for a middle-class life — where they can pay the mortgage, and take care of their kids, and send their kids to college, and save for retirement, and maybe have a little left over to go to a movie and go to dinner once in a while.  (Laughter and applause.)

Well then, Mr. President, by your own standards, your presidency is a failure of colossal proportions. He has moved us from what he labeled “an economy that just worked for those at the top” to an economy that doesn’t work well for anyone, and works worst for those on the lower rungs.

“Find a good job…” Now, “nearly 14 million Americans are looking for work – and millions of those who have found jobs are working for less.” And “about 6.2 million Americans, 45.1 percent of all unemployed workers in this country, have been jobless for more than six months – at its highest since the Great Depression.”

…”pays for middle-class life”… Gas prices up, food prices up, state and local taxes significantly higher…

… “pay the mortgage”… Several years of record foreclosures, with millions more Americans owing more than their house is worth. “West Coast Democrats note that you don’t see [Obama] making stops in neighborhoods recovering from housing foreclosures, because there’d actually have to be a housing market recovery.”

…”take care of their kids”… Harder to afford than ever, in fact: “If prices were to remain constant, a family with a child born in 2010 will spend $226,000, nearly a quarter of a million, before that child reaches the age of 18. Even adjusted for inflation, that is 23% more than people were spending just 30 years ago.”

… “send their kids to college”… CNN: “‘As the out-of-pocket costs of a college education go up faster than incomes, it’s pricing low and medium income families out of a college education,’ said Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of financial aid sites FinAid.org and FastWeb.com. The numbers confirm what most middle class families already know — college is becoming so expensive, it’s starting to hold them back.”

… “save for retirement”… “Putnam Investments survey, which polled almost 3,300 working Americans, found that American households are on track to replace 64% of their current income in retirement.” Obama has yet to propose, much less enact, serious entitlement reform to keep Social Security financially stable in the long term, and in fact demagogues others’ efforts to do so.

… “and maybe have a little left over to go to a movie and go to dinner once in a while.” Dinner? Maybe. But no vacation: “Still-high gas prices and lingering concerns about the economy will keep many would-be travelers home – or closer to home – this Fourth of July weekend.”

Meanwhile, let’s check in on those stock prices and corporate profits that Obama dismisses as useful indicators of economic health.

Actually, they’re doing quite well. First, “Despite high unemployment and a largely languishing real estate market, U.S. businesses are more profitable than ever, according to federal figures released on Friday. U.S. corporate profits hit an all-time high at the end of 2010, with financial firms showing some of the biggest gains.” And while the markets have bounced around quite a bit over the past three years, they have had some high points during Obama’s term, including this observation from January 2011: “Detractors of President Barack Obama should remember one thing — Wall Street has been booming under this president. Since Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up about 48 percent, the S&P 500 Index  is up 60 percent and the tech-focused Nasdaq Composite Index  is up 90 percent.”

So the only economic indicators that are thriving under Obama are the ones he said are not true indicators of success.

Meanwhile, we muddle along with subpar growth, the U.S. economy, as measured by real Gross Domestic Product, has grown 2.6 percent in 2009 and 2.9 percent in 2010.

Obama ran because he believed in many wonderful things, none that have occurred on his watch yet.

Ron Brownstein:

If the economy produces jobs over the next eight months at the same pace as it did over the past four months, the nation will have created more jobs in 2010 alone than it did over the entire eight years of George W. Bush’s presidency. That comparison comes with many footnotes and asterisks. But it shows how the economic debate between the parties could look very different over time — perhaps by November, more likely by 2012. More important, the comparison underscores the urgency of repairing an American job-creation machine that was sputtering long before the 2008 financial meltdown.

Among those many footnotes and asterisks: You’re measuring Bush’s job-creation numbers from the peak of one bubble (the dot-coms, January 2001) to the immediate popping of another (real estate, finance) January 2009. And of course, the unemployment rate has been higher for every month of Obama’s presidency than its worst peak during the Bush presidency (7.2 percent).

So Brownstein can offer the administration new ways to slice the numbers, but the public isn’t buying. The Wall Street Journal/NBC survey “shows that 76 percent of Americans believe that the US economy remains in recession; an even larger 81 percent describe themselves as dissatisfied with the economy.”

From the latest Pew poll:

The public remains doggedly downbeat about the condition of the national economy, even as many experts and economists see signs of recovery. As has been the case for most of the past two years, about nine-in-ten (88%) rate national economic conditions as only fair or poor, and over the past year there has been no decline in the percentage saying the economy will stay the same (36%) or get worse (19%) a year from now.

That must be my video talking down the economy.

Just 33% say the economic stimulus passed by Congress last year has helped the job situation and only somewhat more (42%) say the loans the federal government provided to troubled financial institutions prevented a more severe financial crisis. Less than a third (31%) says that the government has made progress in fixing the problems that caused the 2008 financial crisis.

To quote today’s Morning Jolt: “A strong case can be made that the sudden downturn in the economy in 2008 persuaded a lot of wavering voters to decide, “okay, I’ve had it with Bush, this Obama guy seems smart, let’s give him a shot.” Since taking office, Obama and his team have been misjudging the economy and offering “recovery is just around the corner!” sunshine on a regular basis. I’d contend that not only do they not know what’s just around the corner, but they don’t even have that good a handle on what’s going on now. (Did you know Ohio Democrat Marcy Kaptur called recent testimony of Tim Geithner, Christina Romer and Peter Orszag. “dismaying and out of touch”?)”

More than six-in-ten (62%) say the economic stimulus package enacted by Congress last year has not helped the job situation, while about half (49%) say the government’s loans to banks and other financial institutions did not help prevent a more severe economic crisis. Meanwhile, the public sees little government progress toward fixing the causes of the financial crisis. About four-in-ten (42%) say they see just a little progress; 25% say they see no progress at all.

Remember, Tim Kaine informed us today that Democrats would be running on their record.

I mentioned earlier today that Gallup had found the lowest level of self-professed job security since they began measuring in 1975.

Even as public trust in the Democrats’ economic policies falls, you’re still hearing some folks suggest that the economy might improve enough by November to help mitigate the GOP wave that current polling indicates. It’s possible that we’ll see some improvement, but I doubt it. The economy is more than a number that comes out once a month from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economic indicators are all around us, and voters see them every time they step outside their door.

To illustrate this, I took a drive around my neck of the woods in Alexandria, Virginia, where we’ve been spared most of the worst of the recession.

As you can see, even where times aren’t that bad, there are still plenty of signs that times are still pretty bad.