We live in polarized times. Not only do we disagree with people who hold different political views, many of us also question their decency and intelligence. Today I want to suggest at least a partial solution to our troubled politics. We should all watch season two of the West Wing.

For those who haven’t seen it, West Wing focuses on Democratic President Jed Bartlett’s administration. While the show is almost twenty years old, the administration confronts familiar issues such as immigration, capital punishment, guns, and Supreme Court appointments. What really stands out about the show is its ability to be idealistic about politics while still coming across as plausible. All with some of the wittiest dialogue I’ve ever heard.

Early on in season two, conservative Ainsley Hayes crushes White House speechwriter Sam Seaborn in a debate on the show Capital Beat. The White House then does something unimaginable in today’s political climate: it hires her. What’s more, President Bartlett’s core team comes to value and respect her. When she is being harassed by two junior staffers who send her a vase of dead flowers, Sam fires them on the spot.

Aaron Sorkin is a well-known liberal. So he could easily have caricatured Hayes and her ideological views. She could have been a stereotypical southern conservative offered for comedic relief, or as a contrast to show how much wiser and smarter staffers like Seaborn were. But to his credit, Sorkin didn’t do that. Instead, he sought to really understand how a character like Hayes would think like she does and allow her to ably defend her ideology. He wrote her to be just as smart, insightful, and witty as anyone else. He even wrote a scene where she called Seaborn on his cultural elitism in a debate over gun control when she observed that at his core, he didn’t like people who liked guns. In that scene, she also called him on a blind spot where she noted that he talked a good game about the bill of rights, but didn’t really want to protect the second amendment.

Hayes also grows to appreciate the Bartlett administration. When meeting some conservative friends, one asks her “did you meet anyone who wasn’t worthless [while working at the White House]?” In an eloquent monologue she says that while they could question the White House’s policies, “their intent is good, their commitment is true, they are righteous; and they are patriots.” She ends by saying emphatically, “I am their lawyer.” Hayes understood a truth I wish more of us grasped—that people can disagree with us on issues we feel passionately about, and still be good people.

For issues important to us, some of us wonder how another person could possibly disagree. Actually, asking that question is key to understanding our ideological opponents. Instead of assuming that someone has a different view because she’s stupid or mean, we would do better to ask “how could a decent and thoughtful person see this issue so differently than I do?” We might go on to ask “even if I still hold my original position at the end of the day, what does my friend of the opposite political persuasion have to teach me? What blind spots might she be showing me? What assumptions am I making that she’s pointing out?” To ask these questions requires humility and self-awareness. To answer them requires open-mindedness and wisdom.

Those are the virtues which will help heal our divides and break the hold of poisonous tribalism. Daily, we see politics at its worst. One of the reasons I miss the West Wing was because it gave us a glimpse of what politics could be at its best.