“God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America.” — Otto von Bismarck

Happy Thanksgiving, folks! A friend asked me to write an optimistic post about the best-case scenario for the upcoming Trump presidency. So here is that post.

Regular Noahpinion readers will know that I’m not very excited about a second Trump term. I don’t think the next four years are going to be hell on Earth or that they’ll lead to the collapse of the nation, but I do think Trump is probably going to degrade our institutions, foment chaos, appease our enemies overseas, and appoint a lot of very unqualified people.

BUT, I also do have to admit that Trump’s first term turned out much better than I expected! Trump did foment social and political chaos, but consider the following:

• The economy demonstrated strong growth, with workers at the bottom of the distribution reaping especially large wage gains.
• Thanks to Trump’s rhetoric, the U.S. belatedly woke up to the various threats posed by China, and realized that unilateral free trade has many drawbacks.
• Trump did not lock Hillary Clinton up, or persecute his political enemies in general.
• Trump did great on Covid relief spending, carrying American households through the pandemic and propelling a rapid economic recovery after the pandemic.
• Trump’s Operation Warp Speed was the best Covid vaccine development effort in the world, creating new and highly effective vaccines in a very short period of time, and saving a very large number of lives.
• Very few U.S. government institutions suffered long-lasting damage as a result of Trump.

That’s not the best-case scenario for how Trump’s first term could have turned out, but it’s very far from the worst. All in all, if you told me in November 2016 that this is how Trump’s term would go, I would have breathed a sigh of relief (well, except for learning that we were going to have a giant pandemic, but that was hardly Trump’s fault).

So best-case scenarios are not pie-in-the-sky magical thinking. The second Trump presidency hasn’t been a disaster yet, and there’s a chance it won’t be one. Here are ten pieces of what I see as the most optimistic plausible scenario.

The economy continues to do well

There’s no evidence that economic expansions “die of old age”. Other than the brief weird interruption of Covid in 2020, the U.S. economy has been in perpetual expansion for the last 12 years or more. There’s a decent chance this will continue.

The biggest threat to any economic expansion — a financial crisis — just doesn’t seem to be in the offing. There has been no big buildup of household debt in the U.S. financial system. The rate hikes of 2022-24 caused no more than a few modestly sized bank failures that were cleaned up quickly and easily.

That means the main threat to the economy is inflation. People really hate inflation for its own sake, and also if it rises too much, the Fed could have to raise rates to levels that would choke off the economic expansion. But although inflation did tick up a bit this month, overall inflation expectations remain low and stable:

In the best-case scenario, Trump does nothing to upset this apple cart. He will raise tariffs, but much of the effect could be cancelled out by changes in exchange rates. His threats to curb or end Fed independence — forcing interest rates lower, which would be very inflationary — could turn out to be just a bluff. And Trump’s advisors, like Elon Musk, could prevail upon him to cut deficits, removing another inflationary pressure.

In this scenario, inflation will remain low all on its own, and the economic expansion will likely continue uninterrupted, bringing further wage gains for Americans across the economic spectrum.

Unrest continues to fall

Unrest was the worst thing about Trump’s first term, but there are some signs that this history won’t repeat itself in the second. Trump’s victory in 2024 hasn’t been followed so far by any giant outpouring of anger in the streets, as happened in 2016. Nor have rightists triumphantly marched through the streets as they did in Charlottesville in 2017. In general, the left-right street battles that characterized Trump’s first term have not reappeared. Two people did try to assassinate Trump during his campaign, but these were lone-wolf individuals without a clear political ideology. There has been no recent outbreak of hate crimes, mass shootings, or stochastic terrorism, as there was in 2016-17.

It’s possible that America has simply become exhausted with the constant talk of civil war, coups, and so on. The Palestine protesters are still marching, but they’re small in number and the country has tuned them out. Meanwhile, anger over racism, sexism, etc. seems to be ebbing from newspapers, TV, the internet, and scientific papers. And on the right, the big shift in nonwhite voters toward the Republicans over the past two election cycles may have lessened fears of “replacement”. In other words, the fundamental drivers of the unrest of 2014-2021 may be ebbing fast.

Trump might not do much to revive unrest. He will do mass deportations, but Hispanic voters know this and shifted strongly toward Trump anyway — so it might not make any significant segment of the American electorate very mad. Anger over “migrants” in blue cities may cause even many progressives to turn the other way as Trump gives a bunch of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants the boot.

Trump’s rhetoric will continue to be fiery and chaotic, but Americans may simply have gotten used to tuning it out. Users are leaving X, the most divisive and shouty social media platform, and it’s unlikely that alternatives like Bluesky will replace it. The era when arguing about politics on social media was America’s national pastime may be drawing to a close, with public discussions replaced by small group chats. With the decline of public argument platforms will come the waning of “cancel culture”.

In other words, Trump or no Trump, America may be headed for an era of social quiescence — a grumpy, bitter, quiescence, perhaps, but nothing like the turmoil of the previous decade.

Tariffs on allies are a bluff

Trump has threatened to slap big tariffs on U.S. allies like Mexico and Canada. That would be bad, because it would hurt American manufacturing, by making it harder to get parts and materials.

But it’s possible that this is a bluff. For example, Trump recently threatened 25% tariffs on Mexico unless Mexico stopped migration (which it has been trying to do anyway). Then shortly afterward, he declared that he had had a productive conversation with Mexico’s president, and seemed to say that they had worked things out:

In Trump’s first term he did enact steel and aluminum tariffs on U.S. allies (which Biden sensibly repealed), but a lot of his other threats of tariffs against allies never materialized. It’s possible this term will go much the same way, and American manufacturers will be able to get the parts and materials they need.

Trump’s deregulatory effort helps the U.S. grow faster

During the Biden years, it became painfully apparent that certain types of regulation — especially land-use permitting — were strangling American industry. Some Democrats tried to reform permitting in order to facilitate the transition to green energy, but were largely foiled by progressive factions of their coalition.

Trump and his people will not be hamstrung by having pro-regulation members of their own governing coalition. Trump will follow the typical Republican pattern of appointing anti-regulation people to the civil service, and fighting regulations in court. Having the deregulation-minded Elon Musk on his side may make Trump pay more attention to the issue than he did during his first term. Some Dems in Congress might even team up with the GOP to do bipartisan permitting reform.

Deregulation of land use in America could accelerate reindustrialization and supercharge economic growth.

Trump keeps Biden’s industrial policy but removes the “everything bagel” contracting requirements

Worryingly, Trump has threatened to cancel Biden’s signature policies — the CHIPS Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. That would be a tragedy, since these laws have been more effective at reindustrializing America than any other policy tried thus far.

But it’s possible Trump could be bluffing! Instead, he might decide to keep the policies in place, but make just enough changes to slap his name on them and take credit for them. This would obviously make Democrats mad, but it would preserve these very important policies.

And in fact, some of the changes Trump might make could be positive ones! Onerous contracting requirements — for example, requirements to use a large percent of union labor for government-supported projects even in states without many unions — have proven to be one of the main things holding industrial policy back in America. If Trump simply stripped those requirements from the CHIPS Act and IRA and then left them otherwise alone — or added his own initiatives on top — it would give a big boost to American industry.

Trump’s wacky nominees are replaced by regular conservative types

One of my big worries about Trump’s second term is that he’ll appoint wacky, incompetent people like RFK Jr. to positions of power. But it’s possible that some of these kooky appointments won’t make it through Congress, and others will quickly resign or be pushed out after performing badly at their jobs for a while. And it’s possible that Trump will replace these wacky appointees with competent conservatives.

For example, Trump just nominated Jim O’Neill, former CEO of the Thiel Foundation, to be deputy head of HHS, right under RFK Jr. If RFK resigns, O’Neill would be the most likely person to take the top spot, and would probably do an infinitely better job. And it’s possible that this could become a pattern throughout the entire administration.

Elon or others restrain Trump from fiscal profligacy

The biggest economic danger of Trump’s second term is inflation. Government deficits are one driver of inflation, for two reasons. First, they stimulate aggregate demand by putting money into consumers’ hands. Second, they pressure the Fed to keep rates low in order to help sustain government borrowing, and low rates are inflationary.

Trump has promised huge amounts of tax cuts, without concomitant spending increases. If carried out, this would add huge amounts to the deficit and to the national debt, increasing the risk of inflation and setting Trump up for a showdown with the Fed.

However, some of Trump’s associates — most importantly, Elon Musk — are extremely concerned about the deficit and the debt. Musk correctly identifies deficits as a driver of inflation:

If this attitude prevails in the Trump camp, fiscal hawkishness may thus return to the Republican party under Trump, after a 44-year absence. It would probably involve cutting benefits for the poor, but it would be more fiscally responsible than Trump’s plan for vast tax cuts for the rich.

Trump takes no federal action on abortion

Perhaps the most consequential change to American society that happened as a result of Trump’s first term was that abortion became illegal in some states (thanks to Supreme Court judges that Trump appointed). Some in the GOP now want to enact a federal abortion ban, that would make it illegal throughout the country. However, Trump has promised to veto such a bill. He probably realizes how unpopular it would be. The best-case scenario is that he follows through on this promise, and continues his record of being moderate on abortion rights.

Trump forces an end to the Ukraine war in which Ukraine is not conquered

One of Trump’s major campaign promises was to end the Ukraine war quickly. This is a difficult thing to do, since the U.S. is not a combatant in that war. One option would be to simply withdraw all aid from Ukraine, presumably resulting in Russia conquering the whole country (assuming the hapless, helpless Europeans are unable to step into the gap left by the withdrawal of U.S. aid). That would certainly end the war!

But there are reasons for Trump not to go this route. MAGA rhetoric on this issue has always claimed (falsely) that America is at war in Ukraine. But if that were true, it would mean that if Ukraine were overrun, America would have “lost” a war. That would make Trump look weak — it would be like the Afghanistan withdrawal that started the downward slide of Biden’s popularity, except even worse. All the headlines would declare “America just lost another war!”, and Trump would take the blame.

In fact, Trump seems to be appointing at least a few hawkish people who would be very unhappy with the feeling that America had lost a war to Russia. General Keith Kellogg, whom Trump just named as special to Ukraine and Russia, and Sebastian Gorka, whom Trump just appointed as a counter-terrorism advisor, have both talked about possibly escalating U.S. aid to Ukraine.

Trump’s plan to end the war might therefore be to offer both Ukraine and Russia carrots and sticks. If Russia insists on continuing the war, Trump could threaten to surge aid to Ukraine. If the Ukrainians refuse to cede territory to Russia, Trump could threaten to withdraw aid completely. Thus, he might be able to force a resolution in which Ukraine cedes some territory to Russia but survives mostly intact as a nation.

This would represent a technical loss for Ukraine in the war, but in the long-term strategic sense, it would be a nation-defining victory. Just like Finland in the Winter War, Ukraine would lose territory but ultimately guarantee its independence as a nation. Russia, meanwhile, might agree to this in order to save face, preserve and reconstitute its military forces, and bolster its flagging economy. And European countries would gain time to sort out their dysfunctional domestic politics and build up their defenses against the Russian threat.

In fact, this outcome would probably be the best for all concerned at this point, and if Trump can actually manage to bring it about, it will be a major success.

Trump stands up to China

I saved this one for last, because Trump’s policy toward China will probably be the most consequential thing in his entire second term. Although known as a China hawk from his first term, Trump has recently shown some signs of wanting to appease the Chinese, opposing the TikTok divestment bill and threatening to cancel the CHIPS Act. Elon Musk, Trump’s most important ally, has extensive business interests in the country, and has declared Taiwan to be an “integral part” of China.

On the other hand, Trump has nominated a number of people who are hawkish on China — Marco Rubio for Secretary of State, Mike Waltz for National Security Advisor, Alex Wong for Deputy National Security Advisor, and others. And of course Trump plans to be very confrontational toward China on trade issues, which is likely to make a general rapprochement more difficult.

In the best-case scenario, Trump follows the path of peace through strength, committing to a strong defense of Taiwan, working with allies in the region, and bolstering America’s military deterrent. Trump is also more likely to raise defense spending than Biden was. And there’s even an outside possibility that Elon Musk and other people at the new Department of Government Efficiency will be able to make the notoriously dysfunctional defense procurement process more efficient, allowing the U.S. to get more bang for its buck.

On top of that, Trump might effectively employ the “madman theory” to deter a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. This is the idea that if America’s rivals think the President is a bit crazy, they will be reluctant to start a war, out of the fear that the U.S. would respond with nukes. If any President can act like a loose cannon, it’s Trump; Kamala Harris would probably not have been able to pull this off. In fact, it’s possible Trump already put “madman theory” to use in his first term — there’s a report that in a 2020 meeting with Xi Jinping, Trump threatened to “bomb the shit” out of China if it invaded Taiwan.

If that kind of thing can keep China from launching a major war for the next four years, the whole world will be much better off.

Stay optimistic!

It’s incredibly unlikely that all of these rosy scenarios will pan out. But it’s very possible that some of them will. The next Trump term could be an unending cavalcade of disasters, and we need to both prepare for that and fight to stop it. But at the same time, it’s possible that the outcomes of Trump’s second term end up being just as benign as in his first four years — or more so. So even if you agree with me about all the dangers Trump poses, don’t despair! America has pulled through tough challenges with surprising resilience many times in the past. We should never discount the possibility that we’ll manage to do it again.

This article was originally published in Noahpinion and is republished here with permission.