Republican Greg Cunningham came out swinging in Friday night’s KRQE News 13 debate, repeatedly putting Democrat U.S. Rep. Gabe Vasquez on the defensive over police, immigration enforcement, New Mexico Downwinders, taxes, and his voting record.
But at several points, Cunningham appeared to be debating more than just Vasquez.
Moderator Dean Staley repeatedly interrupted, challenged, redirected, and pressed Cunningham during some of the evening’s most contentious exchanges — at times turning the CD2 showdown into what looked more like a two-front debate for the Republican challenger.
The Oct. 16 debate pitted Vasquez, who is seeking a third term, against Cunningham, a combat Marine veteran, retired law enforcement detective, and Republican challenger.
And Cunningham wasted little time drawing one of the night’s sharpest contrasts: his decades in law enforcement versus Vasquez’s past rhetoric about police.
Cunningham forces Vasquez to answer for defund-police remarks
Staley initially confronted Vasquez with video from a 2020 protest in which Vasquez said police reform was “not just about defunding the police,” but about defunding what he described as a system privileging white people.
Asked whether he regretted the remark, Vasquez initially pivoted to his record of directing money toward police departments and blamed Republican attacks for distracting voters from other issues.
Staley pressed him again: Did he regret it?
Vasquez responded that he does not currently support defunding police.
That opened the door for Cunningham.
“Was that you in that costume?” Cunningham asked, referring to Vasquez’s appearance in the widely circulated protest video. “Was that you wearing that hat and the mask and calling to defund police?”
After Cunningham pressed him directly, Vasquez acknowledged that it was.
Cunningham then moved to Vasquez’s congressional record, asking why the Democrat voted against a congressional resolution honoring and supporting law enforcement officers.
“Did you vote yes or no?” Cunningham asked as Vasquez argued Republicans had inserted language into the resolution that Democrats objected to. Vasquez called the resolution “useless.”
Before Cunningham could continue pressing the point, Staley stepped in.
“If I may, I’d like to move on,” the moderator said, citing the limited debate time.
It would become a recurring pattern.
Cunningham finds himself sparring with moderator
Throughout the debate, Staley frequently subjected Cunningham to sharp follow-ups — sometimes challenging the premise of his answers rather than simply moving to the next question.
When Cunningham argued that repeat offenders, prosecutors, judges, and a lack of accountability were central to New Mexico’s gun-crime problem, Staley responded: “I don’t hear that you’re especially concerned though about the availability and the flow of guns into our community.”
Later, during a discussion of SNAP work requirements, Cunningham said assistance programs must remain available for vulnerable Americans while fraud and abuse are eliminated.
Staley repeatedly pushed him on people who had lost benefits.
When Cunningham said officials did not yet know how many affected recipients were improperly receiving assistance, Staley shot back: “Well, it seems like you might want to find out before you kick them off the rolls.”
Cunningham responded that requiring able-bodied adults without children to work or participate in their communities was not the same as indiscriminately throwing people off assistance.
On taxes, Staley again interrupted Cunningham’s broader answer and demanded a specific spending cut.
“Can you name it, though?” he asked.
Those follow-ups were within a moderator’s role, but their frequency meant Cunningham repeatedly had to defend his premises to Staley while simultaneously trying to draw contrasts with the incumbent congressman.
ICE exchange becomes especially contentious
That dynamic became particularly noticeable during the immigration portion.
Cunningham argued that legal immigration should be made faster and less expensive, supported bringing back a worker program similar to the Bracero program, and emphasized enforcing immigration laws.
He also argued that cooperation between local detention facilities and federal immigration authorities can allow dangerous offenders to be transferred into federal custody before they return to the community.
As Cunningham attempted to explain how that process works, Staley repeatedly interrupted and challenged his interpretation.
“It sounds like you’re blaming sanctuary cities” for some of ICE’s controversial enforcement actions, Staley said.
Cunningham pushed back: “No, sir. I’m telling you what a big part of the situation is.”
He explained that if authorities fail to transfer wanted offenders while they are already in custody, federal agents later have to locate them at their homes or workplaces — places where bystanders can become caught up in enforcement actions.
“If we would allow ICE to separate criminals at the moment that they’re arrested, we would eliminate a lot of what we’re seeing,” Cunningham argued.
Vasquez accused the Trump administration of targeting people without criminal records and described ICE enforcement as overly broad.
When Cunningham attempted to question Vasquez in response, Staley cut him off.
“I’ll be asking the questions if I may,” the moderator told Cunningham.
Staley then continued pressing Cunningham over ICE, asking whether he saw a broader “pattern” of misconduct by federal agents.
Cunningham distinguished between individual officers who behave improperly and his broader support for law enforcement.
“I see men and women, our brothers and sisters and family members that got into law enforcement to do the right thing that are risking their lives every day to go out there and enforce the law,” Cunningham said. “That’s what I see. And that’s what I support.”
‘You’re our congressman’
Cunningham’s simplest attack of the night may also have been one of his most effective.
Again and again, Vasquez blamed President Donald Trump and Republicans for economic problems.
Cunningham turned the argument around.
“You’re our congressman,” he told Vasquez. “You’re there to get something done.”
Cunningham argued that Vasquez could not campaign as an incumbent member of Congress while simultaneously treating problems in Washington as somebody else’s responsibility.
He pointed to proposals involving taxes on overtime and tips and tax relief for Social Security recipients as policies he said could immediately leave more money in working New Mexicans’ pockets.
Cunningham corners Vasquez on Downwinders
The most heated candidate-to-candidate confrontation came over the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act and New Mexico Downwinders.
Cunningham accused Vasquez of campaigning on helping Downwinders but voting against the broader legislation that ultimately carried compensation expansion.
For Cunningham, the issue is also personal: he said his wife is a Downwinder.
“When you stand up and you tell people you’re going to do something, and then you go to Washington and you don’t do it, that creates a sense of mistrust,” Cunningham said.
Vasquez responded that he had worked with Downwinder advocates and opposed the overall reconciliation package because of other provisions involving taxes, Medicaid, and assistance programs.
Cunningham kept returning to the vote itself.
“Is your vote a story or is it your vote?” he asked.
Vasquez attempted to explain the larger legislation.
Cunningham interrupted with another direct challenge: “Did you vote yes or no to help New Mexico Downwinders?”
Vasquez said he voted against the broader bill.
“You voted no to compensate and give New Mexicans what they deserve,” Cunningham fired back.
When Vasquez pointed to his endorsement from Downwinder advocates, Cunningham answered, “It doesn’t matter who endorses you.”
“My wife is a Downwinder,” Cunningham added. “I represent her.”
Moderator keeps Cunningham on the hot seat
The adversarial moderation continued later.
When Cunningham was asked about artificial intelligence and began discussing the water and power demands of data centers — a major New Mexico issue directly connected with AI development — Staley twice redirected him, stressing that he was asking about AI “itself.”
When Cunningham tried to challenge Vasquez over a campaign contribution tied to Oracle ownership during the same discussion, Staley again cut in and demanded Cunningham answer whether the federal government should regulate AI.
Cunningham answered simply: “Yes.”
Staley similarly pressed Cunningham multiple times on Iran, asking him point-blank whether he supported the war after Cunningham explained that, as a combat veteran, he wanted American troops home but opposed allowing Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon.
Staley did challenge Vasquez during the debate as well — most notably by refusing to let him dodge the question about his 2020 police remarks and later asking whether Democrats bore responsibility for Biden-era border policies.
Vasquez conceded in the latter exchange that Democrats “absolutely bear the responsibility for some of the awful policies under the Biden administration” involving asylum seekers.
Still, Cunningham spent a significant portion of the evening not merely rebutting his opponent but responding to repeated skeptical follow-ups from the moderator.
Cunningham keeps returning to the record
Despite the interruptions and rapid-fire questioning, Cunningham continually brought the debate back to Vasquez’s votes.
His closing statement distilled that argument.
“We are, as politicians, we are the sum of our votes,” Cunningham said. “We can stand up here and say whatever we want to say. But ultimately, what we vote and how we vote is who we are.”
He cited RECA, taxes on tips and overtime, and immigration legislation before drawing a contrast between himself and Vasquez.
“The contrast could not be more stark,” Cunningham said.
He closed by pointing to his record as a combat Marine, police officer, business owner, father of six, and grandfather of nine.
“My life has been in service,” Cunningham said. “My life will continue to be service to the people of New Mexico. I’ll fight for them.”
For much of Friday night, Cunningham did just that politically — taking on an incumbent congressman while repeatedly having to defend his answers against an aggressive moderator at the same time.
Watch the full debate here: