Just in time for the dreaded sixth-year midterms, Politico Magazine has a long article trying to answer the question: “Can Obama Reboot?” The better question is the subtitle: “Does he even want to?” Indeed, considering the record of recent presidents and the overall power of the presidency–grown even more expansive, as so often happens, in this latest administration–if Obama wants to change course, he can. What has differentiated him from his immediate predecessors is that they were willing to do so, and Obama has not shown much interest in learning from his mistakes. The reason for that, it turns out, is buried deep within the Politico profile of a very self-pitying president.

The story begins with the midterms and how Obama loves to campaign but Democratic candidates don’t want to be seen with him. Then there are the absurd statements of King Obama the Underdog: “More than anything, Obama’s loathing for Washington, an attitude that reads as ennui to outsiders, has hardened into a sullen resignation at being trapped in a broken system he failed to change, advisers told us.”

Well, considering he’s been running vapid campaigns, cynically attempting to damage the credibility of both Congress and the Supreme Court, overseeing a weaponized IRS, further entrenching special interests, and speaking of those who disagree with him as his “enemies,” it’s no surprise the status quo hasn’t budged. Obama has been the status quo, politics-as-usual president. He didn’t “fail to change” anything; he refused to change, and he failed.

The story continues with testimony from others in Washington that Obama seems ready to give up; that his my-way-or-the-highway routine was no bluff, and now he’d like to pack up and be on his way. It’s enough to almost make you feel sorry for the man, until you remember he’s the leader of the free world and hasn’t stopped complaining from day one. Additionally, any sympathy the reader might have for Obama isn’t requited; we soon find out that Obama doesn’t think much of the voters, who don’t seem to think much of him.

The key paragraph comes when the Politico reporters discuss the possibility that Obama will be better off once the midterms are behind him–even if they’re disastrous for Democrats–because that means the next election is a presidential-year contest. And an Obama administration aide makes a revealing argument:

“It is important to recognize in this election a tiny fraction of voters will vote in a handful of states that are terrible for the president,” the senior White House aide said. “There are like, two Americas—there is a midterm America and a presidential-election-year America. We would be making a big mistake, heading into a presidential election year where we are not on the ballot but our party is, to make a whole series of strategic decisions based on the politics of an electorate that will not exist two years from now.”

There are two major problems with this line of reasoning. The first is that it represents a base-only messaging strategy. What the Obama official calls “an electorate that will not exist” is actually the percentage of voters who care enough about politics and policy to stay engaged for their congressional and gubernatorial elections. These are the more informed voters. The electorate that Obama–and national Democrats–much prefer is this midterm electorate plus their base, which is made up of voters who turn out for the cultish leadership campaigns, popularity contests, and divisive and condescending identity grievance politics of the presidential campaigns Democrats have mastered.

The problem is that this strategy may be running out of steam, as Jonathan wrote earlier. This year, the White House’s “war on women” has flopped so spectacularly in blue states that Democratic Colorado Senator Mark Udall is now getting heckled by a Democratic donor over his obsession with reproductive politics. Why won’t he talk about anything else? they wonder. Because Democrats have been programmed not to. That may change, even as Obama clearly believes the Democrats will be gearing up to repeat this strategy in 2016.

The other problem with the Obama administration’s iteration of “like, two Americas”–the bro version of the classic trope–is that it reveals the extent to which Obama and those around him misunderstand the basic structure of American democracy. Maybe this is deliberate–delegitimize that which you disapprove of–but it’s still a mistake.

Obama would like to believe that the midterm elections are not really a reproach of his governing or a wholesale rejection of his policies because if you ask everyone who votes in presidential years, he gets higher marks. But in fact the midterms are just such a reproach because the Congress is the only means by which voters can check the ambitions and agenda of a president, since they can’t vote for Supreme Court justices. This is especially true of the sixth-year midterms, when there will not be another chance to vote out the president.

Obama seems to think that any vote that is not a direct referendum on his policies is a poor guide to crafting an overarching party agenda. That’s wrong, and it helps explain why Obama can, but probably won’t, “reboot.”