Poll of all polls! -- RACE FOR GOVERNOR 2010 (Las Cruces, Santa Fe: friendly, radio)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NM is like most places- liberal-minded registered voters far outnumber conservative ones.
Conservative voters pretty much always vote.
When liberals are rallied and turn out, liberal candidates win. When liberals are not, conservatives win.
The biggest X factor in any race is not so much voters deciding who to vote for, but voters deciding whether to vote or not.
If we could roll back the clock to April, Denish would have a much better position to work from if she had embraced the left side of the spectrum (not just done a little lip service here and there to both left and right topics), and gotten more legwork done in terms of "GOTV"-ing liberal voters. She did neither, so it's Martinez's to lose.
After the election, not much will change in terms of NM's electorate. A better D candidate will achieve better results in future years.
There's some truth in what you say. But, the expectation is that the trough will be a bit smaller and the feeding more honest.
Depends on your point of view regarding honesty, and the trough seems big enough for both parties to get their fill. I've seen it in action. Close "associates" of mine in Dona Ana county are dyed-in-the-wool, hard-core, come-to-Jesus Republicans. They have personal relationships with Steve Pearce and Susana Martinez. During the eight years of the Bush administration, they made 100% of their living off of lucrative government contracts (pork) thanks to the largesse of Pearce and his cronies. Some of this money makes it way back to Pearce, etal, through generous contributions to the Republican party. All the while, these "associates" b*tched and moaned about government spending and tax rates. Talk about hypocrisy.
I'm not naive enough to believe that the Dems aren't guilty of the same thing, so whenever a politician says he's going to clean up corruption, what I hear is "move over, it's our turn at the trough."
Diane knocked it out of the park, totally exposed Susana for the stuffed shirt she is. Diane was calm and composed, made her points well, while Susana just sounded like an angry woman who was against everything and for nothing. Susana sounded like a prosecuting attorney making a closing argument against the "Denish-Richardson administration" while Denish pointed out that New Mexico voters "aren't stupid" and know that there is only one governor at a time.
Favorite moments (which I'm paraphrasing):
On domestic partnerships:
Denish: I don't believe in discrimination and would sign a domestic partnership bill.
Martinez: I would not sign a bill, I'm against domestic partnership legislation, but I don't believe in discrimination.
Denish: You can't stand there and say you're against discrimination when you just said you would discriminate against same-sex couples.
On the Denish ad saying "Susana es una tejana"
Martinez: Why do you say I'm a tejana in those ads? I'm offended.
Denish: I am proud to be born in New Mexico, as I'm sure you're proud to be born in Texas. But I didn't introduce Texas into this campaign. You did, by accepting the single largest donation in New Mexico history, a donation from a corrupt Texas developer, a friend of Karl Rove. You've accepted huge donations from Texas businesspeople who are friends of Dick Cheney and George Bush, the same people who ran our economy into the ground.
On corruption:
Denish (to Martinez): If you want to fight corruption, start in your own DA's office (referring to the huge bonuses Martinez gave to her staff with federal money for border security and awarding no-bid contracts to cronies).
On illegal immigration:
Denish: I also would overturn the driver's license law, but we have to look at people who hire illegal immigrants. Martinez doesn't want you to know that her running mate, John Sanchez, has hired illegal immigrants to work for him and has been cited for it, not once, but twice.
Denish asked Martinez if she would close the corporate tax loophole that allows large out-of-state corporations to hide their profits shifting a $70 million tax burden to New Mexico families and small businesses. Martinez said "I'm against raising taxes." Denish said "it's a yes or no question, would you close it, yes or no?" Martinez: "I'm against raising taxes." This went on a couple of more times until it was comical. Then Denish turned to the camera and said "This is the defining moment", saying that she proved Martinez would continue to give tax breaks to corporations and balance the budget on the backs of regular, hard-working New Mexicans.
Denish mopped up the floor with Susana. It wasn't a pretty sight, but it needed to be done.
Depends on your point of view regarding honesty, and the trough seems big enough for both parties to get their fill. I've seen it in action. Close "associates" of mine in Dona Ana county are dyed-in-the-wool, hard-core, come-to-Jesus Republicans. They have personal relationships with Steve Pearce and Susana Martinez. During the eight years of the Bush administration, they made 100% of their living off of lucrative government contracts (pork) thanks to the largesse of Pearce and his cronies. Some of this money makes it way back to Pearce, etal, through generous contributions to the Republican party. All the while, these "associates" b*tched and moaned about government spending and tax rates. Talk about hypocrisy.
I'm not naive enough to believe that the Dems aren't guilty of the same thing, so whenever a politician says he's going to clean up corruption, what I hear is "move over, it's our turn at the trough."
I hate to break this to you, but Pearce was only in Washington for 2 terms, you make it sound like he was there the entire 8 years. I am anything but a Pearce supporter, but I hate comments that one would like to pass off as fact when this isn't true.
Denish stuttered most of the time .... and called Susana a "Liar" 5 times. Not only was it tacky, but very very trashy.
Disapointed with both, but the polls speak for themselves.
brad, isn't it amazing how some think, just because a person says what they want to hear the debate was won by that person? I agree, of course I didn't hear the debate, but calling anyone a liar is tacky, below what I want from my represenatives, regardless of the office they hold and feel anytime a politician sinks that low they are grabbing for anything they can.
I hate to break this to you, but Pearce was only in Washington for 2 terms, you make it sound like he was there the entire 8 years. I am anything but a Pearce supporter, but I hate comments that one would like to pass off as fact when this isn't true.
Nita
I think you are missing the point of my posting. Both parties are guilty of corruption, and this is an example of such. If the GOP is not corrupt, it's only because they are not in power. As they say, politics makes strange bedfellows.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
