By Pat Davis, nm.news — I’m tired of hearing and reading about how Deb Haaland and Gregg Hull won’t debate each other. Their campaigns will both say they have tried and this week they both pledged to show up – to different debates in different places and on different dates.
Pat Davis
Pat Davis is a former police officer and recovering politician working to save local news for New Mexico. After serving two terms as an Albuquerque City Councilor, he became the founder and publisher of nm.news.
The truth is, standard televised debates rarely change anyone’s mind. Standard formats—where candidates line up behind podiums and recite canned responses to run out the clock—don’t reflect how governors actually govern. Governors don’t make decisions from behind podiums; they make them in closed rooms with advisors and lobbyists armed with arguments to win the day. What voters really need to know is how candidates evaluate the world around them and how they make decisions under pressure, and you won’t learn that from 60-second scripted answers and they don’t have to be on the same stage to do it.
Consider the current scheduling mess: Haaland’s campaign offered dates during the week of Oct. 12, but proposed a single debate joint-broadcast across multiple competing networks—a deal local TV stations, whose business relies on ratings, aren’t likely to accept. Meanwhile, Hull signed on for a debate by KOB on Oct. 8, a date Haaland’s team had already stated she was booked for in southern New Mexico. The result is a predictable stalemate where both sides claim the high ground while avoiding a real confrontation.
Honestly, none of this is surprising. Frontrunners rarely have anything to gain from debates, while challengers hope for a misstatement they can loop in campaign ads. Hull is using Haaland’s reluctance to debate as a talking point, just as Sam Bregman did during the primary. Yet Haaland defeated Bregman by nearly 50 points, proving voters didn’t need a debate to choose.
Now in the general election, Hull, lagging in both fundraising and polling, needs Haaland to make a big mistake to shake things up. As the frontrunner, she has little incentive to play along.
Still, candidates for public office should have to face voters and answer tough questions. Hull is right that we need to hear about the issues, and Haaland is right that a handful of Albuquerque stations shouldn’t control the process. But there is a better way.
Instead of timed answers and podiums, candidates should sit down for hour-long “nothing off-limits” interviews with skilled journalists. Tough interviewers armed with voting records can push past canned responses, force candidates to address past statements, and demand specific details until a question is properly answered. Making these interviews freely available to media outlets statewide would allow voters to watch the candidate responses side-by-side on TV, online or on their phones.
Let’s ask Gregg Hull why he dodged questions about President Trump’s endorsement in the primary and force him to say whether he has asked, or would accept, it now. Ask Deb Haaland why she never asked who paid for the private jet chartered by Jeffrey Epstein she flew on during the 2014 campaign. And ask them both whether they would sign or veto specific legislation from both parties that has failed in past legislatures to reform CYFD and bring doctors back to rural communities.
I’ll volunteer, as will a dozen other journalists who report on these issues every day. The current debate over debates is political posturing that shortchanges the public. Voters deserve deep answers to big questions, and it’s time we try something different.