they spoke about the push for a better politics before an audience of about 200 people at the Lory Student Center, part of CSU’s thematic Year of Democracy. CSU President Amy Parsons moderated the discussion, which was co-sponsored by Colorado Politics.

“Disagreeing better doesn’t mean don’t disagree; people have different values, different faiths (and) different political opinions,” Polis said. “That’s what makes our democracy in our country so wonderful. But it’s how you handle that. How you let it lead to a better outcome. How do you form common cause?”

And you can’t just tune out, either, Polis said. “That’s the danger is that the rest of us tune out because it seems so unpleasant and so derogatory. And that’s in many ways the worst thing that could happen for civil society and democracy.”

The governors don’t want to dampen debate, which they see as crucial to a functional political system. Instead they are trying to model debate with less demonizing, less hostility, and less anger. And they believe that right now an “exhausted majority” of people want that more than anything.

The governors are pushing the initiative though public debates like the one that happened Wednesday in Fort Collins, through service projects, public service announcements, bipartisan ads and a variety of other tactics.

Polis hopes modeling this kind of behavior makes it more comfortable for everyday folks to disagree better, too, not just politicians. Pointing to the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday as an opportunity, he challenged listeners to try to get your MAGA uncle in a conversation over turkey dinner with his woke niece.

“Engage with others and bridge that divide,” Polis said. “We have a holiday coming up, Thanksgiving, a national day of gratitude. I think around extended family dinner tables, there’s people of all different political persuasions, and it’s a good opportunity to be curious, ask questions, be civil.”

So what are specific tactics we can employ to disagree better?

“I encourage people to be curious,” Cox said. “‘Tell me more about why you feel that way?’ That question does two things. It calms me down, because my first instinct is to fight. And by the way, no one has ever changed their mind by attacking them. It also shows that I’m interested in the other person. If you ask it enough, and get them to the why, you’ll find you have something in common. Almost always it comes down to them loving their country, their family, their community.”

The other thing Polis and Cox think is really important is humility. “Our founders talked about this a lot. George Washington talked about it, James Madison talked about it, John Adams talked about it,” Cox said.

If you can walk into a hostile situation, and admit the possibility that you might be wrong, you’re going to have a far better conversation, Cox said. That gives the other person permission to think they might be wrong as well.

Cox also said one of the best ways to depolarize daily life is to stop watching cable news, like Fox, MSNBC and CNN.

“My wife and I just celebrated 11 years of not watching cable news, and our marriage is better, our family is better,” Cox said. “People laugh when I say that; I’m telling you it’s true. Our lives are better; they’re happier, healthier because we stopped watching cable news.”

What I didn’t hear in the conversation Wednesday was what happens when people say there is no way to civilly disagree or dignify the viewpoint of people who want to overthrow the government, or won’t acknowledge someone’s right to exist. How to disagree better when you see the other side as a threat rather than someone to work with?

Cox admits that he gets that reaction a lot. In a similar forum at Harvard recently, he acknowledged that “on the right, criticism is that you’re being too nice.” Certainly we saw that dynamic play out in the recent fight for the House speakership, in which a speaker who worked across the aisle for a deal to keep the government running was deemed not pure enough and ousted from his job.

“On the left, it’s: we can’t engage with those people. They’re a very threat to my existence, if I’m part of a marginalized community. How dare you tell me I should engage in an understanding and positive manner with someone who doesn’t want me to exist?”

Cox’s answer wasn’t very satisfying. “If you really care about your side and about your argument, you’re going to have to convince other people to see what you see and believe what you believe. And we don’t do that by attacking people.”

That only works if both sides of a debate are willing to “disagree better.”

In the end, will this noble initiative make any difference? Can a little more civility really move us forward, save our republic?

Cox answers by citing the 2015 passage of a bill in Utah banning discrimination against LGBTQ+ people in housing and employment. He was the lieutenant governor at the time and took part in discussions that brought together members of the Legislature with Utah’s LGBTQ+ and religious communities.

“They all came together, basically locked themselves in a room for like a month and they hammered out” what became known as the “grand compromise,” he said. It was a bill that protected the rights of LGBTQ+ people in housing and employment while also expanding the religious freedom of churches.

“It wasn’t winner-take-all kind of thinking; it was how do we both find a win here? And they did. And I’ll never forget that night. It was the last night of the legislative session. We had a signing of the bill in the rotunda with thousands of people there. Behind me, we had the high-level leadership from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the LGBTQ community embracing. We had the “evil forum,” the most conservative group in the state, and Equality Utah standing shoulder to shoulder.

“That’s a high I’m still chasing. … That was one of the proudest days I’ve had in politics.”