As welcome as it might seem as an exercise in provoking conversation about one year hence with a President Trump, the faux front page in Sunday’s Ideas section does a disservice to truly understanding the choice we face.

There is no way that any of the stories you presented could come to pass. However, the more vivid the picture of what “could’’ happen, the more the pump is primed for what would happen. Donald Trump or his principal rival, Ted Cruz, will pull back their most extreme positions. But by then, the still-serious abridgement of the Constitution that they wish for will seem “reasonable’’ and a point on which to compromise.

Prosecuting physicians for performing abortions will seem reasonable after pulling back on arresting women who seek them. Stepped up powers for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement will seem like a compromise for not building a bigger wall. John Bolton will seem like a rational choice for secretary of state compared with people like Sarah Palin. And after all, water boarding is obviously more humane than subjecting someone to the rack.

Becoming acclimated to outrageous possibilities unfortunately blinds us to the real dangers in the more likely middle. The benefit of this kind of editorial event in the Globe may not outweigh the damage of moving the curve further to the right.

K. M. Peterson

Brookline