Trump is already trying to shift responsibility elsewhere in mid-term elections

Consider the 2016 election from President Trump's point of view. It was repeated to him again and again that he had no chance. He was told this before embarking on the race; he was told that once he won the Republican nomination; it was said that as Election Day approached. And then: surprise! He won.

If he believed his rhetoric during the campaign, there was an ocean of silent support ready to support him; the polls and the media were wrong – the election results seemed to validate these claims. He said that he was a political genie in so many words. And what would happen if. . . he was really? (We asked this question to two campaign experts last year.) The verdicts were mixed.)

We all have something like that, just at lower stakes. The neighborhood tree looks a little shaky and you tell a friend that he will fall. After the next big storm: you have been validated! You are not an arborist, of course, but something escaped you and your prediction was accurate. Then maybe . . . Are you an arborist?

Whatever the case may be, in an interview with The Associated Press on Tuesday, Trump was asked about the upcoming mid-term elections. If the Republicans lose control of the House (as seems likely), is Trump responsible?

"No," Trump replied, "I think I help people."

(It's unclear if the title of the AP on this subject – "Trump tells AP that he will not be held responsible if GOP loses House" – is what motivated the president's tweet "FAKE NEWS" on Wednesday morning.)

Trump continued.

"Listen, I'm 48 and one in the primaries, and in reality that's a lot more than that because I've endorsed a lot of successful people and people who do not even speak to it. ", did he declare. "But many of those 48, as you know, in some cases, people had no chance." He listed some races in which he claimed to have had a positive effect on the candidates.

We have already experienced this before: the numbers that it presents are a bit zany. But the biggest problem with Trump's argument is that he reformulated the issue under obviously favorable conditions. Of course, Trump can influence the electorate in a Republican Party primary – these voters are all Republicans! Republicans love Trump. The AP speaks of November, of Democrats versus Republicans, and Democrats (and Independents) have a very different opinion of the President.

La Poste and our partners at ABC News have released a new survey over the weekend that addresses this issue.

The approval of Trump is still under water, as they say, with more people disapproving than approving it. This is true among Democrats and, to a lesser extent, independents. (The charts below only include those who say they are certain to vote.)

(Philip Bump / The Washington Post)

When asked if it was important to have a candidate who shares the respondent's point of view on Trump, about 6 out of 10 answered yes, but those who disapproved of Trump were: more likely to say that it was important.

We also asked party respondents who wanted to have control of the Congress: the Democrats, who would serve as a means of control over Trump, or the Republicans, to support his program?

More than half of the respondents, including nearly 6 out of 10 self-employed, said the first.

It's a pretty clear picture. Of course, many Republicans want to show their support for Trump, but more and more respondents are explicitly insisting on candidates who oppose Trump and want Democrats to control Congress to keep Trump under control.

So, why is Trump so confident? Apparently because of 2016.

"I think we are going to be successful," he told AP, describing the crowds he had seen two years ago and how it had suggested he emerge victorious. (A pedant would notice that the size of the crowd has little relation to the total votes, as evidenced by the popular voting margin in the Trump race.)

"Honestly, it's like 16," he added, confessing, "Now, I'm not sure it's true." Why not? "I'm not running," he continued. that people had told him to love him personally but did not think that he cared about Congress and would not therefore vote.

We have already seen this model before. After Trump approved the Virginia governor candidate, Ed Gillespie, last year and Gillespie was defeated, Trump blamed the candidate for having[ing] me or what I represent. Would that have helped Blue Virginia in an election in which Democrats rushed to the polls to demonstrate their opposition to Trump? Almost certainly not.

The 2016 elections taught him that being himself and trusting his instincts would allow him to resist the experts and win the victory. This showed him that his base was sufficient to lead a political victory. Of course, there are asterisks – it only won thanks to the electoral college; he won because skeptical Republicans have returned to partisan loyalty; he won because his opponent was also largely unpopular – but these are neglected. The tree fell; He knew what he was talking about.

Trump gets to have both. If Republicans win, it's because Trump has urged voters to come and vote. If Republicans lose, it is because they have not sufficiently energized voters by being like Trump.

Ignored in this equation, just as they were ignored in Trump's initial response: voters who are motivated to oppose Trump. Voters are also the responsibility of Trump – and there are many signs that they are the most important group in this election.