Maybe it’s time to grab that hammer and break the glass.

If you’re a supporter of democracy—and Joe Biden—here’s why you should be concerned. No matter how rosy your rose-colored glasses are, it is unlikely that the president’s electoral prospects are going to get a whole lot better. Arguably, in the past two weeks he has had his most impressive stretch as commander in chief: flying into the heart of a war zone; showing unstinting strength, poise, and solidarity with Israel, one of America’s most important allies, at a crucial, tragic, and historic moment, while also highlighting the humanitarian crisis affecting Palestinian civilians in Gaza; and prompting typically teeth-gnashing Republicans to follow his lead.

And yet, a Suffolk University–USA Today poll last week showed Biden trailing Trump by as much as six points (49% to 43%) when would-be voters were asked which candidate they favored on foreign policy; by 11 points on the economy (52% to 41%), and by nine points on immigration (50% to 41%). Even more troubling for Democrats: Trump leads Biden in five key swing states according to a Bloomberg–Morning Consult poll: Arizona (by a 47-43 margin), Georgia (48 to 43), North Carolina (47 to 43), Pennsylvania (46 to 45), and Wisconsin (46 to 44).

What’s more, Biden’s prospects in these must-win states has only gotten worse, despite millions in ad spending. Hell, Biden’s approval rating among Democrats, according to Gallup, has dropped 11 points in the last month. Contributing to this big dip, as Axios noted, may well be Biden’s staunch stand on Israel, which does not necessarily sit well with many progressives, millennials, and Gen Z voters, not to mention Muslim and Arab American voters, whose ranks hold significant sway, particularly in Michigan, another state that is very much in play.

Granted, there is a lot of time between now and next November. And as former Biden chief of staff Ron Klain recently observed on The Circus—the weekly Showtime broadcast that I cohost—current polls may be lagging indicators, not having fully absorbed very recent developments.

But if the plan is to just assume things are going to improve for Biden—and worse for Trump (yeah, those indictments, and his “flip”-prone former cronies, have already blown a hole in his hull), then I think there’s a lot of reason for worry. Hope, as filmmaker James Cameron once advised, is not a strategy.

The question I’ve asked Democrats repeatedly over the last year or so is: If we get to next May or June, and Trump is beating Biden in the polls by double digits, what’s plan B? The response? Crickets.

That’s where the political organization No Labels comes in—a group I helped cofound in 2010 but with which I’ve had no affiliation for the last decade. First, as a general proposition, I’d posit that a system that produces Trump and Biden as the nominees of the two major parties is an ossified system—one in dire need of disruption. Second, I would point out that No Labels has already done the hard work of making it possible that there might actually be another option, another choice, by spending $60 million to get a No Labels ticket on the ballot in all 50 states, plus Washington, DC. Seems to me like a pretty democratic idea.

Ironically, organizations that supposedly support preserving and expanding democracy, such as the Lincoln Project and Third Way, have become apoplectic about this plan to offer voters more choices. They continue to assert what I consider to be a falsehood: that the No Labels effort will inevitably tip things in Trump’s favor.

In fact, the opposite is true. Whether or not you like him or agree with his politics, the founding chairman of No Labels—former senator Joe Lieberman (Al Gore’s running mate in 2000)—is a man of deep faith. His word is gospel. He says the whole point of the No Labels initiative, version 2023–24, is to ensure that Trump is never elected president again.

So how could that play out? Well, one option is a theoretical moon shot. Many Americans, according to various surveys, believe that neither Trump nor Biden should be running. What if those voters chose an alternative unity ticket. Unlikely? Improbable? Of course. But, hey. It seemed impossible that a real estate developer from New York, who’d never run for office before, could be elected president. The argument I hear all the time in politics (and that I’ve previously written about for Vanity Fair) is that X won’t happen because X has never happened before. And then it happens. I bring this up again because if there ever was an unpredictable time in our politics, this is it.

So, if we get through the primaries—and it turns out that an independent unity ticket garners, say, 20% of voters support against Biden and Trump, at, say, 35% each—then No Labels would pull the plug and not participate any further in the race.

But there is another option. That is: No Labels makes good on its pledge to ensure that Trump is not elected. By denying him victory in one or more of the key swing states. By putting a Republican No Labels candidate on the ballot, but only in those pivotal states. Imagine a favorite son or daughter approach. In other words: backing a willing Republican who is particularly popular in a battleground state. For example: Pat McCrory in North Carolina. Doug Ducey in Arizona. Brian Kemp in Georgia. Mitt Romney in Nevada. Paul Ryan in Wisconsin. Tom Ridge in Pennsylvania. John Engler in Michigan. Or how about Liz Cheney in any or all of them? You know she’d be game to push a big stick into Trump’s electoral spokes.

Mathematically, all you have to do is affect the outcome in a couple of these states to tilt the results in Biden’s favor. And while some may argue that those candidates could draw significant votes away from Biden, I’d make a strong bet that you could get enough Republicans to vote for, say, Pat McCrory in North Carolina (voters who would never otherwise cast ballots for Biden, but who could have possibly considered voting for Trump) to make a couple point difference in the outcome, one that hurts Trump’s chances.

One caveat, for what it’s worth. If there were ever a hint of evidence that any No Labels effort would actually help Trump, a number of us with current or previous ties to the organization—presumably, along with No Label’s opponents and detractors—would stand up and blow a whistle. Loudly.

Yes, it’s a complicated series of bank shots. But at this point, I’m certainly willing to look at every option to try and guarantee that Trump remains as far away as possible from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. What I’m not willing to do is just hope that things turn out okay. Because in 2016, that didn’t turn out so well.