Election seasons often get heated in Idaho and nationwide.

We all have our favorite candidates, who receive “hero” status from some of us. And if there’s a “hero” on our election ballot some of us seem to need a “villain.”

It’s pretty cool that in America we have regular elections and power sometimes shifts from one individual or political party to another and this all happens without bloodshed culminating in a military or civilian uprising.

We’re not alone in this regard. European nations, Canada, Japan and many countries in South and Central America and Africa can make political transitions without violence. The Middle East seems to be a troubling exception.

However, this election season in the United States has had some pretty rough rhetoric — even by American standards.

And the harsher the rhetoric the more alarmed we are that we’re entering dangerous ground in our communities, state and nation.

There are those among us who cannot simply vote against a candidate. They need to paint the opposition as the enemy. Differing views begin to border on hatred.

This election should expose different perspectives on the role of government in an economic recovery, the path toward secure energy and better educational achievement. Security in a world filled with uncertainty and an oppressive national debt are also critical points of debate.

Yet our elections somehow devolve into angry personal evaluations of the people running for office. Nowhere is this more evident than in the race for president.

Democrats have branded Mitt Romney as a rich, out-of-touch corporate raider who hides the extent of his fortune and will further erode the middle class with even more American jobs headed to foreign lands. Does the man who helped raise a family of five boys, governed a state and displays an unwavering dedication to his religious faith deserve the concocted image of a one-dimensional corporate pawn?

Republicans have done their best to create an image of Obama as a failed leader who somehow created the entire financial mess he largely inherited when he took office in 2009. Extreme views in the party have called him a socialist, a Muslim and a foreign-born threat to the American way of life.

The Journal recently received an email that went so far as to say the president of the United States is a plant designed to wrest control of this nation on behalf of some mythical Arab power brokers.

Silly, yes. But it shows the danger of a “them or us” world.

Here in Idaho intense debate over education reforms has resulted in personal attacks against state superintendent Tom Luna.

Luna’s plans are open to criticism — and it’s incredibly easy to take issue with his ill-conceived initiatives. But he is not evil. On Nov. 6 we can all have the final say on which direction Idaho’s public education system will go without vilifying Luna as a person.

Politics and politicians may be partly responsible for this decay in civilized discourse over issues. It’s so much easier for someone running for any elective office to start critiquing the personality or personal appearance of his or her opponent than it is to stick to the issues.

The Nov. 6 election is not about good versus evil. Elections in America are typically about selecting leaders who convince us they will help pave the best path to a successful future.

The process is not about the triumph of individuals as much as the triumph of ideas.

And as voters we are contributing to the hatred and mudslinging of political campaigns when we continue to be swayed by negative advertising.

If it didn’t work, no one would use it.

Let’s demand civility. Elections don’t determine the fate of our nation. The people who live here do.