Based upon previous experience, I'd say they are on the right track...
https://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/19/world/clinton-approves-a-plan-to-give-aid-to-north-koreans.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/08/09/history-lesson-why-did-bill-clintons-north-korea-deal-fail/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a8ce022bbd20
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

Plus that Libya statement, whether a flub or not, highlighted the fears already held by the NK Government.

My personal belief is that for a long term rather than short term solution (of the peaceful variety... Relatively peaceful), one would need to be able to convince a large portion of the upper echelons to accept a sizeable payout, combined with international amnesty from their multitudes of human rights violations, in exchange for a transfer of power. (The difficulty here is: finding a person/group/nation that would be acceptable to all major parties involved, it is tempting to propose reunification, but I don't think China is quite ready to lose their buffer state.) Even were this agreed to, its likely some military action would be required. The primary goal of this plan would be to make it possible to dismantle the NK Government without having SK turned into a "Sea of Fire".

 The question to whether this is possible or not is how power-mad the NK leaders have become, whether they truly enjoy their tyranny (Undoubtedly some of them do) or if it was simply the case of making the best of a bad situation, as some Nazi's did. If we can find enough leaders willing to accept the deal (Which would likely need to be brokered in secret, and in piecemeal stages to avoid potentially alerting the more fanatical leaders) it should be relatively easy to infiltrate, and eliminate, whatever opposition to the regime change that remains. Obviously, certain high priority targets, Kim Jong Un for example, as well as whichever Military leaders directly control the batteries arrayed along the DMZ, must be acquired, or if acquisition is impossible, would need to be eliminated in the initial stages of the operation -though I tend to think without Un, this plan would probably be unworkable.

"But Spooki! If we can turn all those leaders to our side, is it really necessary to displace them?"

Yes. Unless the security of these leaders is 100% guaranteed, it is more preferable to them that the status quo remains unchanged. Kim Jong Un, the beloved Supreme Leader, would likely suffer a fate similar to Mussolini if North Korea were to undergo a sudden and dramatic liberalization, as would many if not all high government officials. Basically you would be dealing with an Oriental spring (which China can absolutely not allow to happen on its border)

Or we can continue to practice "Strategic Patience" :rollin Thanks Obama, now they have atom bombs hydrogen bombs, and ICBM's

The other option is a series of precision nuclear strikes (bit of an oxymoron that) Combined with somehow disabling the entire DMZ Arsenal in what I would consider to be the most well coordinated large scale operation of all time.

Of course none of this happens without the go ahead from China, which I imagine is driving Trump absolutely bonkers

Edit: it just occurred to me that this premise is based upon the idea that no Tyranical Government that I know of has been displaced through entirely peaceful means, if anyone has an example of one, it would be much appreciated.