Opinion | Three Paths to Containing Trump

Last fall and winter, the president of the United States tried, with ineffectual technique however violent penalties, to strain Republicans to overturn an election that he fairly clearly misplaced. Now he reportedly believes that swing-state “audits” will in some way reinstall him within the White House by the tip of summer time. Many of the courtiers who inspired his earlier delusions are nonetheless busily at work; one in every of them, Michael Flynn, lately prompt (earlier than backpedaling) that the United States wanted a Myanmar-style navy coup.

This will not be a super state of affairs. Making it significantly much less very best is the robust proof that ought to he need it, the 2024 G.O.P. nomination will probably be Donald Trump’s to take.

So what wants to occur to maintain Trump’s dreampolitik from spilling over into actuality once more, in the best way of Jan. 6 or in some extra destabilizing kind?

The first idea, held by many liberals and centrists and some anti-Trump conservatives, is that we’re in a unbroken emergency that may finish in one in every of two methods: Either a Democratic Congress will enact far-reaching electoral reforms that decisively weaken the present G.O.P., or else Trump and his supporters will make a simpler and harmful bid to steal the 2024 election.

Under this idea, non-Trumpist Republicans ought to be talking out always, within the mannequin of Liz Cheney, in opposition to the menace Trump poses to democracy. The Biden White House ought to surrender on bipartisanship and spend its capital attempting to kill the filibuster and go huge on voting rights. And Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema ought to be reminded day by day that will probably be their fault when the disaster comes.

At the second, nevertheless, this idea seems to be a counsel of despair, since not solely Manchin and Sinema however different Democratic senators utilizing them as cowl have little urge for food for the maximalism that it calls for.

But these cautious Democrats, and their sympathizers contained in the Biden White House, would deny that they’re sleepwalking into disaster. Their idea is that ordinary politics defeated Trump in 2020 and regular politics can do it once more. If you don’t need Republicans to conduct election shenanigans in 2024, then your aim ought to be to maintain the House and Senate in 2022, and also you’re extra probably to do this in case your celebration is perceived as open to bipartisanship; laser-focused on the financial system; and opposed by obstructionist extremists.

If you spend all of your vitality breaking the filibuster, against this, you’ll depart your personal average senators extra uncovered (that means not simply Sinema or Manchin, but additionally figures like Maggie Hassan, up for re-election in New Hampshire after profitable final time by about 1,000 votes) for the sake of a voting-rights invoice which may not have a serious impact on Democratic turnout and wouldn’t essentially forestall the postelection energy grabs that Trump urged on Republicans final fall. Far higher to dare the G.O.P. to filibuster standard payments, use reconciliation to cross your financial agenda, and have the restoration and Biden’s average picture reasonably than constitutional revolution as your gross sales pitch to suburban voters in 2022.

If the emergency idea appears despairing, the average idea looks like it may benefit from a little bit extra strategic considering, particularly about what sort of laws would stop some future subversion of the vote. (A reform to the bafflingly advanced Electoral Count Act of 1887 looks like a spot to begin.)

And if the average idea seems cautious and unheroic, properly, it’s received nothing on the unheroic inactivity of most Republicans hoping to defang Trumpism, who’ve satisfied themselves that the best way to keep away from a worse replay of the 2020 endgame will not be to combat him overtly in any respect.

But this craven unheroism, which ushered Cheney out of the Republican management, will not be really loopy. Let’s assume that polarization and the worry of liberalism will maintain Republicans aggressive in nearly any circumstance. In that case, as Andrew Prokop identified final month, making inner G.O.P. politics a sustained referendum on anti-Trumpism would possibly simply amplify his energy, assist his worst loyalists win primaries, and improve his capability to demand harmful issues.

Whereas if accountable Republican officeholders ignore him they’ll hope to outlast him, and even when he takes the nomination once more they’ll nonetheless be there (in contrast to Cheney, or Jeff Flake, or Justin Amash, or …) to play the identical position they performed within the aftermath of 2020, when not one of the essential Republican governors or secretaries of state (or for that matter Trump-appointed Supreme Court justices) went together with Trump’s extra outrageous, election-overturning calls for.

This is the purpose once I’m supposed to inform you which of those three approaches will really Stop Trump and which is able to ignominiously fail. But the irritating fact is that as diversifications to the unprecedented weirdness of the Trump phenomenon, all three attitudes — maximalist, average and intentionally inactive — appear considerably cheap.

Which means, in our period of assured surprises, that each one three will most likely be rendered irrelevant by some flip of occasions between now and 2024.

The Times is dedicated to publishing a variety of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you concentrate on this or any of our articles. Here are some ideas. And right here’s our e mail: [email protected]

Follow The New York Times Opinion part on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTOpinion) and Instagram.