After the 2024 presidential election, some BYU law students have ways individuals can diffuse contentious discussions and engage productively with others.
According to a Pew Research Center report, 65% of American adults say they always or often feel exhausted when thinking about politics. Additionally, 55% of adults always or often feel angry when thinking about politics, while 11% say they rarely or never feel angry.
Ligia Valencia, a third-year BYU law student pursuing criminal law, said a lack of active listening during political conversations is a contributing factor to the exhaustion and anger.
"We might not want to sit down and just listen to each other," Valencia said. "I think a lot of times, we sit down and we talk, but in our head, we might be tuning the person out."
The media portrays different views of both presidential candidates' platforms that target emotions, she said.
"If there is something that emotionally speaks to them, I think they'll focus on that — even if it's not being portrayed as loudly as other beliefs or ideals," Valencia said.
Valencia is a first-generation Mexican-American student and has seen how her background influences the way individuals treat her.
“It definitely shapes ... how either I’ve been treated or how I’ve seen other people be treated because I am of a different group,” she said.
Valencia said her life experiences are valuable because they foster connection between her peers.
"Telling them what I've gone through, I think, really helps with the applicability aspect," Valencia said, "You hear of these hypotheticals, but you're like, 'When has it ever been applied?'"
River Tanner, a third-year BYU law student aspiring to practice corporate law, said though he has been involved in conversations that have become politically charged, he has had relatively few during his time in law school.
“It might be because of the law school experience, where you start to recognize that there really are two sides to an argument at the very least,” Tanner said.
Politics and policy are constantly touched upon during law school, especially during constitutional law classes, he added.
“Generally, you’re going to be talking about the way the court should interpret the law and what the law should be, and I think that that is pretty wrapped up in politics. And, it’s pretty hard to get your political biases out of that,” Tanner said.
During election campaigns, there has been a clear trend of making the statement that "if the other party wins, then America is going to fall apart," Tanner said.
"There is a benefit — there is an incentive — to try to demonize the other side because then you have to vote for the person that's closer to your side," Tanner said.
The first thing to do when approaching a contentious conversation is to let go of the idea that an individual with opposing political views is bad, John Zenger, a first-year law student, said.
“If you think that people are bad, then you’re not going to accept what they say and you’re going to take everything as an attack. So if you think of them as a good person who thinks differently than you, then you can actually be calm and persuasive,” Zenger said.
Zenger said he believes the media has been the most significant factor in polarizing people.
“With this election, both sides have made it existential, so they’ve said, ‘Democracy's on the line,’ and both sides have been saying that,” Zenger said. “I’d say TV and journalism have definitely amplified that message that everything is at stake when, in reality, maybe not everything is at stake.”