My question was short and simple: Do you still have confidence in Steve Bannon?

President Trump’s answer was also short, but incredibly explosive. Although the military dropped the mother of all bombs in Afghanistan last week, the mother of all bombshells the president dropped is vastly more important to his presidency.

As the political world knows, Trump declined to say yes to my question, creating a clear impression that his chief strategist is on thin ice. The “under the bus” notion surged on social media.

The prospect of Bannon’s departure from the White House immediately set off frenzied reactions on two fronts. Anger and five-alarm fire bells broke out in much of Trump Nation, while celebrations took place on Wall Street and in congress.

The polarized response captures the outsized way Bannon is seen by both friend and foe. Loved and hated passionately, he is in some ways more Trump than Trump. That’s his appeal and his Achilles Heel.

The liberal press and Democrats — I know, that’s repetitive — call him Rasputin, a madman and a white supremacist. His defenders call Bannon the “True North” of the 2016 revolution, the man who had a gut instinct and a compelling vision for bringing abandoned blue collar voters into the GOP tent.

Many of those voters proudly call themselves the “deplorables,” making a badge of honor out of Hillary Clinton’s slur. Their payback was turning blue states red and putting Trump in the Oval Office.

To them, Bannon is too important to fire. Trump’s answer shows he doesn’t agree and wanted Bannon to know it.

In truth, Trump has reason to be unhappy. His tenure has been unnecessarily bumpy, and although there have been important successes, there have been missteps and false starts, in policy, personnel and communications.

After Trump, Bannon gets the lion’s share of blame for the problems, with his critics saying he is far too aggressive about trying to make sure every decision breaks the Washington mold. When he doesn’t get his way, he’s all bare-knuckles and some reports say he uses unflattering press leaks to damage his rivals.

Most articles about infighting pit Bannon against Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, and others of a more moderate, even liberal, bent, including Gary Cohn, the Goldman Sachs alum who is chief economic advisor. The reports have been so detailed that something is clearly amiss.

That’s why I asked the president if he has confidence in Bannon.

Trump started by saying “I like Steve, but you have to remember he was not involved in my campaign until very late. I had already beaten all the senators and all the governors, and I didn’t know Steve.”

My hunch that Bannon was not getting a vote of confidence was confirmed when Trump added that, “I’m my own strategist and it wasn’t like I was going to change strategies because I was facing crooked Hillary.”

He ended with a dagger: “Steve is a good guy, but I told them to straighten it out or I will.”

In fairness to Trump and Bannon, every administration goes through a shakeout period. Most presidents shuffle the deck within the first year as campaign aides are jettisoned as governing takes precedence.

But just as Trump is unique as the ultimate outsider, Bannon is not just another interchangeable part. He is a singular figure and without him, it’s hard to see who earns the trust and keeps the flame of the “deplorables.”

Trump’s answer to me and to others since suggests he doesn’t believe he needs Bannon because the candidate himself had the vision all along. And it is reasonable if Trump takes offense when somebody is seen as his “brain” or the real president.

Not incidentally, the liberal media reserves those ideas for GOP presidents, using them as code to smear Republicans as too dumb to think for themselves. Nobody was called Bill Clinton’s or Barack Obama’s “brain,” but Trump joins Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush in not being seen as smart enough.

Yet media bias is irrelevant to the concern among many Trump supporters that the administration is adopting fairly conventional policies and tilting toward Democratic views on globalism. The Syrian missile strike is eyed with suspicion by some, as is Trump’s threat to work with Democrats to fix ObamaCare after GOP repeal efforts failed.

Any talk of “betrayal” is never a good sign in the first 100 days. Moreover, Trump has almost no support among Democrats for anything, so losing a chunk of his base would endanger his presidency. He already has too few friends and too many enemies.

If the math becomes more lopsided, tax reform would be dead, as would his immigration policy and most of the America First agenda. Democrats would then use gridlock as a hammer in the 2018 midterms.

My view, then, is that, unless Bannon did something unforgivable, it’s too risky and too soon to cut him loose. While Trump must be comfortable with the people around him, he also needs a mix of ideas to make sure he’s getting the best options. Bannon has proven he has something to offer.

Trump’s claim, that he is the real voice of Bannon’s supporters, has merit, but he can’t always play that role because as president, he must reflect the will of the entire nation. Aides are free to advocate for a slice of it.

Because he is operating with so little margin of error, Trump should give Bannon another chance.

In that sense, governing and campaigning are alike: both are games of addition. You must broaden your appeal while holding on to what you have. That’s the art of being a successful president.

Words to the wise

A press release from state senator Phil Boyle, a Long Island Republican, touts the “a $5 million companion animal capital fund” in the Albany budget. After reading through the bureaucratese, I figured out what a “companion animal” is. It’s a pet.

That’s politics. Never use a ten-cent word when you can use $5 million words.

GOP’s ribbiting metaphor

Congressional Republicans have a thing for frogs. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell described his effort to stop defections among the 52 GOP senators in the Neil Gorsuch confirmation fight as “getting all my frogs in the wheelbarrow.”

It’s a memorable image — but not an original one. Two years ago, then House speaker John Boehner described his job this way: “My goal every day is to try to keep 218 frogs in a wheelbarrow long enough to get something passed.”

Weiner pastures

Huma Abedin wants $2 million for a book that could tell all about Anthony Weiner’s sexting scandal and Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Heart be still. Imagine learning how the Russians simultaneously cost Clinton the White House and forced Weiner to become a pervert. Now that’s collusion!