Piñon Post

National backlash erupts after NM doctor says Charlie Kirk ‘deserved’ to die

38 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

In the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, a doctor in Albuquerque has drawn national attention and condemnation for social media posts in which he appeared to celebrate the violence.

Dr. John R. Vigil, identified in his public profile as board-certified in Addiction Medicine (not Virgil), a Fellow of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, a Master Addiction Counselor, and associated with the University of New Mexico School of Medicine and JRV Medical Group, posted two messages on Facebook following Kirk’s death. 

In one, he reportedly wrote: “If you’re looking for sympathy from me over the death of a MAGAt, it’s between sh*t and syphilis in the dictionary!” In a second post, he said, “I’ll probably lose friends over this, but besides Trump, I can’t think of a more deserving person to get just Karma!”

Those posts, first shared widely by online commentator Cam Higby of Today is America via X (formerly Twitter), included accusations that Vigil said Kirk deserved to die and called the killing just. According to those who shared the posts, Vigil is a managing partner at JRV Medical Group in Albuquerque. 

Reaction and Broader Context

The posts prompted swift backlash. Some commentators say they amount to glorification of political violence. On social media, prominent figures noticed; among them, Elon Musk replied to one of the posts with “!!” — a brief response that drew attention but has not been further elaborated. 

The controversy arises amid heightened national scrutiny over the assassination of Charlie Kirk, which is being widely treated as a political killing. Kirk was shot while speaking at Utah Valley University, and the event has triggered intense conversation about political violence, free speech, and extremism in the United States.

Credentials and Roles of Dr. Vigil

Dr. Vigil’s social media profile and public listings describe him as:

  • Board-certified in Addiction Medicine,
  • Fellow of the American Society of Addiction Medicine,
  • Master Addiction Counselor,
  • Author,
  • Affiliated with JRV Medical Group, and
  • Affiliated with the University of New Mexico School of Medicine in Albuquerque.

These credentials add weight to the public reaction, as they suggest Vigil operates in roles that involve public trust and professional responsibility.

What Is Confirmed, What Is Not

  • Confirmed: The posts attributed to Vigil, as shown via screenshots and social media shares, contain the quoted language. Multiple sources have made the association between those posts and Vigil’s professional identity. 
  • Not Confirmed / Unclear: There is no public statement yet from Vigil confirming authorship or context beyond what has been shared. It is likewise unclear whether there has been any formal action by his employer, by the University of New Mexico, or by medical licensing boards. There is no record yet (at least in widely circulated national reporting) of institutional investigations.

Potential Consequences and Ethical Dimensions

Such comments from a medical professional raise ethical and political questions. Physicians are generally expected, under professional codes and licensing regulations, to adhere to standards of conduct both inside and outside the clinic, especially when public statements might affect patient trust or public reputation. In some states, professional conduct rules permit investigation into off-duty speech if it reflects adversely on the ability to practice or violates laws (including hate speech, incitement, or threats).

If Vigil’s employer or the UNM School of Medicine becomes involved, possible responses could range from public censure, suspension, or review by a medical board—though action depends on state licensing laws and internal institutional policies.

Looking Ahead

At this time, no formal institutional discipline has been confirmed. It remains to be seen whether Dr. Vigil will issue a public apology, clarification, or retraction. Public reaction continues to simmer, with some calling for consequences and others defending free speech—even harsh speech—in politically charged times.

National backlash erupts after NM doctor says Charlie Kirk ‘deserved’ to die Read More »

AG Torrez cries ‘racism’ after SCOTUS backs DHS crackdown on illegals

19 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez lashed out Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court for granting the Department of Homeland Security and the Trump Administration authority to continue critical immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles. In reality, the Court’s action did nothing more than restore the long-standing ability of federal officers to do their jobs while a lawsuit continues in the lower courts.

In a 6–3 decision, the justices stayed a sweeping injunction issued in July by U.S. District Judge Maame Frimpong that had barred ICE agents from considering obvious factors when determining whether someone might be in the country illegally. That order, cheered by activist groups, effectively handcuffed federal law enforcement by forbidding them from looking at context such as location, type of work, language, or appearance when making quick field decisions.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and the Trump Administration appealed, arguing the injunction dangerously tied the hands of immigration officers at a time when illegal crossings and criminal alien activity are overwhelming communities. The Ninth Circuit had upheld Frimpong’s restrictions, but the Supreme Court intervened, restoring federal authority until the case can be fully argued. A district-court hearing on the plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction request is scheduled for September 24.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, concurring with the majority, underscored that officers must still follow the Constitution by relying on “reasonable suspicion” under the totality of the circumstances — the same standard courts have recognized for decades. What the Court rejected was the idea that officers must blind themselves to reality. It is common sense that language, location, and certain behaviors can factor into suspicion when combined with other evidence.

Torrez, however, responded with dramatic claims that the Court’s decision “allows federal agents to continue to stop and detain people because of their skin color, the language they speak, and the work that they do.” That rhetoric badly misrepresents what the Court did. No justice endorsed racial profiling. The justices simply recognized that ICE agents must retain the discretion to act in high-risk environments without fear that every judgment call will be second-guessed by activist courts.

The facts bear repeating: immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles were targeting day-labor pickup sites where agents had documented a high concentration of illegal entrants, including individuals with criminal records. Critics of the raids, including the ACLU, want the courts to effectively prevent agents from acting in those contexts. The Supreme Court, by contrast, affirmed that DHS cannot be stripped of its basic enforcement tools while the litigation plays out.

Torrez’s broadside is not about protecting citizens — citizens have nothing to fear if they are law-abiding and carry identification. His outrage is about scoring political points by echoing activist talking points that conflate lawful immigration enforcement with racism. It is telling that he framed the Court’s ruling as an “insult to New Mexicans,” when in truth it simply preserves federal agents’ ability to apprehend criminal aliens before they endanger communities.

The bottom line of the Court’s action is simple: DHS must have the authority to enforce immigration law, and the Supreme Court ensured that authority remains intact. Torrez’s mischaracterization only sows fear and confusion, while Sec. Noem and the Trump Administration have taken the responsible position of defending the tools officers need to protect the public.

AG Torrez cries ‘racism’ after SCOTUS backs DHS crackdown on illegals Read More »

NM’s woke senators whine about illegal aliens being deported

28 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico’s two Democrat U.S. Senators, Martin Heinrich and Ben Ray Luján, are once again prioritizing illegal immigrants over American citizens. This time, they’ve joined more than 40 Senate Democrats in demanding that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem walk back a commonsense statement from her department acknowledging that Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients are not automatically protected from deportation.

DACA, created by the Obama administration in 2012, shields certain illegal immigrants—often called “Dreamers”—from deportation on a renewable two-year basis. These individuals entered the U.S. unlawfully but have been granted special privileges under the program, including work authorization.

The controversy began after DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin made the obvious point: “Illegal aliens who claim to be recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) are not automatically protected from deportation.” Heinrich, Luján, and their fellow Democrats rushed to attack the statement, insisting that deporting DACA recipients would violate the intent of the program.

In their letter to Secretary Noem, Heinrich and Luján claimed, “DACA was created to provide protections from immigration enforcement for certain noncitizens brought to the United States as children, also known as Dreamers.” They further demanded that DHS “correct” McLaughlin’s remarks and abide by DACA protections moving forward.

The letter also lamented recent enforcement actions against DACA holders, including the detention of one individual in New Mexico. Democrats argued that such actions “disrupt families, harm communities, and inflict unnecessary social, emotional, and economic costs”.

What the Democrats ignore is that Congress never passed DACA and that it remains an unconstitutional executive action. Even the courts have repeatedly limited or questioned its legality. Yet Heinrich and Luján are pushing to expand protections for those who entered the country illegally while New Mexico families struggle with crime, poverty, and a broken health care system.

This is not the first time New Mexico’s senators have sided with illegal aliens over their own constituents. Earlier this year, Heinrich introduced legislation to shield DACA recipients’ personal information, and both senators signed on to efforts urging the Biden administration to reopen new applications despite ongoing court challenges.

Instead of addressing border security or the crisis of fentanyl and human trafficking pouring across New Mexico’s southern border, Heinrich and Luján are once again “crowing” about protecting people who broke America’s laws.

NM’s woke senators whine about illegal aliens being deported Read More »

Sen. Luján melts down in hearing, wags ‘starfish pin’ at HHS Secretary Kennedy

30 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

What was supposed to be a serious Senate Finance Committee hearing on Thursday spiraled into political theater when Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), a live-action role player (LARPer) of a U.S. senator, repeatedly badgered Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., at one point holding up a novelty starfish pin and declaring the secretary “unworthy” of it.

Luján opened his questioning by accusing Kennedy of ignoring expert advice, citing the resignation letter of Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, a former CDC director. When Kennedy answered that he was regularly briefed, naming Dr. William Thompson, Luján dismissed the reply and pressed for more, berating the secretary as evasive, while unhinged, claiming Kennedy couldn’t understand Luján’s “New Mexico accent.”

The senator then fixated on a contractor, David Geyer, claiming he was secretly conducting a government autism study despite Kennedy’s clear denial. Kennedy explained that Geyer was a contractor with limited access to federal data, but Luján insisted otherwise, throwing accusations and dredging up unrelated past legal disputes. “Do you know who works for you, Mr. Kennedy?” Luján peformatively sneered before repeatedly interrupting Kennedy’s attempts to give him an answer.

The exchange reached peak absurdity when Luján waved a starfish pin he said had been given to him at a town hall in Las Cruces. In a dramatic scolding, he told Kennedy: “I was going to give it to you today, but after your questioning today, I don’t think you deserve it.” Luján went on to lecture Kennedy with a children’s parable about tossing stranded starfish back into the ocean, before concluding, “I’m sorry that you’re not worthy of this nice little pin … today was a failure for you, man.”

Kennedy, visibly frustrated after being repeatedly cut off, accused Luján of “showboating” for the cameras. The back-and-forth left the New Mexico Democrat looking more interested in theatrics than substance, with his condescending tone and props drawing raised eyebrows even from colleagues.

Instead of pressing for answers, Luján’s tirade devolved into what critics described as a bizarre stunt that trivialized a serious discussion on health policy. His “starfish speech” capped off an afternoon where Kennedy was often interrupted and prevented from responding fully to questions.

For many watching, the moment cemented Luján’s reputation for turning hearings into spectacles. What should have been an exchange about facts and policy instead ended with a senator making himself the headline.

Sen. Luján melts down in hearing, wags ‘starfish pin’ at HHS Secretary Kennedy Read More »

Governor’s special session ignores crime crisis, focuses on bashing Trump

15 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced Thursday that she will convene lawmakers in a special session beginning Oct. 1, 2025, citing what she called “devastating” federal budget cuts signed into law by President Donald Trump.

According to the governor’s office, the session will focus on preserving access to critical services in the wake of steep reductions to Medicaid and food assistance programs. The administration’s proposed agenda includes stabilizing rural health care providers through grants, lowering health insurance costs for families losing Medicaid coverage, boosting food aid for children and seniors, and shoring up the state’s Health Care Authority as it braces for new Medicaid enrollment changes.

“New Mexicans should not be forced to shoulder these heavy burdens without help from their elected officials,” Lujan Grisham said, blaming Washington for forcing costs onto the states. Legislative Democrats echoed her message. Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe) called the session “essential to protect our rural healthcare providers, safeguard Medicaid coverage, and ensure that New Mexicans don’t bear the burden of federal failures.”

House Speaker Javier Martínez (D-Albuquerque) struck an even sharper tone, saying, “New Mexico is not going to allow Trump and the radical right to take food off your table or kick your family off your healthcare plan.”

But Republicans say the governor’s priorities miss the mark. Senate GOP leaders announced they will use the special session to again press for tougher juvenile justice laws, stronger accountability for repeat offenders, reforms at the troubled Children, Youth and Families Department, and changes to medical malpractice policies they argue would expand health care access.

GOP lawmakers argue that past Democratic opposition has blocked common-sense reforms aimed at curbing crime and protecting vulnerable children. They also point to long-standing Democratic resistance to joining the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact, a move they contend would attract more doctors to the state.

This October’s meeting will mark the seventh special session under Lujan Grisham’s tenure. The governor has also indicated she wants to fold in discussions of behavioral health challenges tied to public safety, which could stretch into next year’s regular 30-day session.

The political clash sets up a familiar dynamic: Democrats framing the gathering as a shield against federal cuts, while Republicans push to address crime, child welfare, and health care reforms they say New Mexicans have demanded for years.

Governor’s special session ignores crime crisis, focuses on bashing Trump Read More »

MLG’s top aides cash in: Raises up to 26% while state workers get 4%

15 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s office has granted sizable raises to roughly 20 senior aides—some as high as 26%—far outpacing the 4% increase most state employees received this year.

Spokesman Michael Coleman defended the adjustments as a response to “market realities,” noting the aides are effectively on call around the clock. “The governor’s senior staff salaries were adjusted to reflect the extraordinary level of expertise and experience they bring to serving New Mexico,” Coleman said. “These seasoned professionals could command higher compensation in the private sector but choose public service.”

Republican leaders objected, arguing taxpayers aren’t seeing commensurate results while the state contends with persistent problems in health care, homelessness, and child welfare. “With so many urgent challenges facing our communities, taxpayers deserve to see meaningful results, not just expanding payrolls for political appointees,” said House Minority Leader Gail Armstrong, R-Magdalena.

Salary records on the state Sunshine Portal show Chief of Staff Daniel Schlegel’s pay moving from $201,893 to $234,000 (16%). General Counsel Holly Agajanian received a 19% increase to $208,000. Deputy Chief of Staff Diego Arencon and Director of Cabinet Affairs Caroline Buerkle each rose 9%. The largest percentage bump went to administrative assistant Leah Mountain, whose salary climbed 26% to $78,000. Coleman himself received a 10% raise.

All state employees received a 4% boost effective July 1 under the $10.8 billion budget approved in March. The Governor’s Office did not specify when its senior staff raises were authorized; if approved before July, the across-the-board 4% would be calculated on the higher base. Coleman framed the larger increases as targeted to “specialized executive roles,” adding, “These professionals have helped secure billions in federal investments, navigate unprecedented challenges, and position New Mexico as a national leader on multiple fronts. That expertise has value, and the governor believes that retaining it serves every New Mexican’s interest.”

This isn’t the first time top aides have seen notable pay hikes under Lujan Grisham. Similar raises were approved in late 2022 and early 2023 after her reelection, and about eight senior staffers received sizable increases in 2020 during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The governor’s own salary remains $110,000, unchanged since she took office in 2019 because statewide elected officials’ pay is set in statute. Lujan Grisham signed a 2023 law raising those salaries beginning in 2027—after her term—setting the next governor’s pay at $169,714.

Other branches have also lifted compensation. New Mexico Chief Investment Officer Vince Smith’s June raise of nearly 40% makes him the state’s highest-paid employee at $455,000, with many Investment Office staff also receiving increases. Legislative Finance Committee Director Charles Sallee’s salary rose from $193,640 to $213,200 this year, according to Sunshine Portal data.

We have previously exclusively reported on Lujan Grisham’s extravagant staff raises, such as in 2023, where she lavished huge pay bumps to staffers.

MLG’s top aides cash in: Raises up to 26% while state workers get 4% Read More »

Jon Jones cleared after explosive DWI cover-up claim

6 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Former UFC heavyweight champion Jon Jones has put a major legal issue behind him after prosecutors dismissed charges linked to a February traffic incident in New Mexico.

Jones had been accused of fleeing the scene of an accident earlier this year. But according to a press release cited by Fox News Digital, the case was formally dropped Tuesday when the state filed a nolle prosequi, ending the matter before it reached a scheduled bench trial.

His attorney, Christopher A. Dodd, said the outcome confirmed what Jones had maintained from the beginning.

 “We have been fully vindicated,” Dodd said. “From the very beginning, we explained that a woman made a false allegation against Jon in an effort to avoid being arrested for DWI, and unfortunately, the police accepted that claim without properly weighing the facts. Once the relevant documents were finally disclosed by the police department, Jon’s cell phone records made it undeniably clear that he was nowhere near the scene of the crash. We are grateful that the district attorney’s office took the time to conduct a full and fair review of this case, which ultimately confirmed Jon’s innocence.”

Dodd added that his team is still scrutinizing how law enforcement handled the matter.
“At the same time, it is deeply troubling that such critical evidence was disregarded, forcing Jon to endure this ordeal unnecessarily. Our investigation into how this occurred remains ongoing,” he noted.

The accusations stemmed from a February crash in Albuquerque, when a woman claimed Jones had been driving one of the cars and left the scene. Police records indicate the woman showed “significant intoxication” at the time.

Dodd has consistently rejected the allegations. Back in June, he said, “Jon was not driving that night; he wasn’t in the car. It appears that an intoxicated woman used a false allegation against Jon to avoid being arrested for DWI, and the police fell for it. Based on the criminal complaint, it looks like they went so far as to seek a warrant for Jon’s cell phone records while conducting a misdemeanor traffic investigation. I have never heard of such a thing.”

Jones, who retired in June while still holding the UFC heavyweight belt, has fought sparingly since 2020. Though he announced his retirement, he has also hinted at a possible comeback in 2026.

Jon Jones cleared after explosive DWI cover-up claim Read More »

Longtime Republican lawmaker files to run against Leger Fernandez

12 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A veteran Republican lawmaker from Clovis is stepping into the race for New Mexico’s 3rd Congressional District, setting up a challenge to far-left Democrat Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez in 2026.

State Rep. Martin Zamora, who has served four terms in the New Mexico House, filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission in July, officially opening the door to fundraising and spending for a congressional bid. The sprawling northern district stretches from the Texas border across the eastern plains and up through much of northern New Mexico, reaching as far south as Hobbs.

Zamora confirmed his plans in an interview, saying he has been preparing for the campaign quietly.

NM State Rep. Martin Zamora (R-Clovis) official portrait.

“We are fundraising right now and plan to work hard at winning this seat. We just feel like we need to do some work before we publicly announce,” Zamora said.

Leger Fernandez, an attorney from Santa Fe first elected in 2019, has consistently secured re-election by wide margins. According to federal filings, she began July with nearly half a million dollars in campaign cash.

Zamora, 64, said his decision to run is rooted in faith and service rather than partisanship.

“I respect Theresa for who she is, what she’s done, but I feel like…God put me here, and my opportunity to serve is now, and that’s why I’m stepping up to the plate,” he explained.

A farmer and rancher by trade, Zamora won his seat in 2018 by defeating Democrat George Dodge Jr. He currently represents District 63, covering parts of Curry, De Baca, Guadalupe, Roosevelt, and San Miguel counties. In the Legislature, Zamora serves as the ranking Republican on the House Agriculture, Acequias, and Water Resources Committee. He has consistently opposed the state budget and pushed, unsuccessfully, to allow public dollars for homeschool and private school students.

Earlier this year, one of his bills was signed into law by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, authorizing the New Mexico Finance Authority to provide loans and grants for dozens of water projects across the state.

Though Democrats hold a 14-point registration advantage in the district, Zamora says he sees a path forward.

“We have a lot of people, even Democrats, who have given us a handshake and told us that they’re going to support us,” he said.

Longtime Republican lawmaker files to run against Leger Fernandez Read More »

‘No right is absolute’: MLG’s past haunts her after new crime comments

21 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) told Axios this week that Democrats should be “tough on crime,” touting her deployment of the National Guard to Española and Albuquerque while attempting to contrast her approach with that of former President Donald Trump.

“I think Democrats ought to be tough on crime,” Lujan Grisham told Axios. “But being tough on crime does not mean that you are breaching people’s constitutional rights, like free speech.”

The governor insisted that her deployments were cooperative measures with local governments, adding, “The difference between Trump and me is that I’m working with local authorities and not imposing my will on them to fight crime.”

But critics quickly pointed out the irony. Lujan Grisham has repeatedly breached constitutional rights during her time in office. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she imposed sweeping unilateral mandates on businesses, churches, and gatherings that shuttered much of the state and drew legal challenges. More recently, she attempted to suspend New Mexicans’ constitutional right to bear arms in Bernalillo County and Albuquerque through a controversial executive order. That order was immediately struck down by a federal judge appointed by Joe Biden, who reminded the governor that constitutional rights cannot simply be erased by executive fiat.

At the time of that order, Lujan Grisham defended her move with the shocking claim: “No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute.” That led to calls for impeachment and an effort by state Reps. Stefani Lord and John Block have continued to propose impeaching her, a measure they have brought forward at each legislative session.

That statement has continued to haunt the governor, particularly as she now attempts to position herself as a defender of constitutional rights while deploying state military forces into communities plagued by violence. Albuquerque, for example, ranks among the most dangerous cities in the world, with crime levels rivaling cities like Caracas, Mogadishu, and Tijuana.

The New Mexico Shooting Sports Association blasted Lujan Grisham’s Axios comments on social media, writing:

“In September 2023, @GovMLG tried to nullify the Second Amendment in Bernalillo County through executive order in the name of ‘fighting crime.’ We had to sue her immediately to stop her flagrantly unconstitutional actions.”

Other New Mexicans also expressed outrage. Rose Griswold wrote in response: “Breaching people’s constitutional rights is A-okay when it’s their 2nd Amendment rights, though, huh Michelle?”

The governor’s remarks highlight a growing political divide over crime policy as Democrats like Lujan Grisham and California’s Gavin Newsom attempt to recast themselves as “tough” without embracing the effective enforcement strategies associated with Trump and Republicans. However, her record of executive overreach and constitutional violations complicates her messaging.

As violent crime continues to plague New Mexico—particularly Albuquerque—Lujan Grisham faces mounting criticism not only for failing to curb lawlessness, but also for attempting to erode rights in the name of public safety as her final years as governor come to a close. Her claim that she differs from Trump because she “works with local authorities” — completely untrue — may do little to reassure New Mexicans who remember her sweeping mandates, restrictions, and failed attempts to suspend fundamental liberties.

‘No right is absolute’: MLG’s past haunts her after new crime comments Read More »

Vasquez on the ropes after voting against biggest middle-class tax cut

11 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A newly released poll from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) suggests Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-NM-02) faces an uphill battle heading into the 2026 election, with Republican messaging centered on taxes, inflation, and immigration resonating strongly across battleground districts.

The survey, conducted in 46 competitive House districts—including New Mexico’s Second Congressional District—found that Democrats like Vasquez who voted against the GOP’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” may pay a steep political price. The legislation, championed by President Donald Trump and House Republicans, included what the NRCC calls “the largest middle-class tax cut in generations,” expanded Medicaid funding, and provisions to bolster border security and national defense.

According to the poll, voters are significantly less likely to support Democrats who opposed the package. Key liabilities identified for Democrats include:

Backing the “largest tax hike since WWII”—$4.5 trillion affecting 80% of Americans (65% less likely to support)

  • Raising taxes by $3,000 on the average family (65%)
  • Cutting the Child Tax Credit (63%)
  • Fueling inflation with what Republicans describe as “reckless spending” (62%)
  • Raising taxes to fund healthcare for illegal immigrants (61%)
  • Providing taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal immigrants (60%)
  • Opposing work requirements for welfare recipients (59%)

“These numbers show exactly why Gabe Vasquez is vulnerable,” said NRCC spokesman Reilly Richardson. “If raising taxes and rewarding illegal immigrants is Democrat Gabe Vasquez’s idea of ‘public service,’ voters have another word for it: unemployment.”

The NRCC memo emphasizes that Republicans are gaining traction on voter concerns about the cost of living, where inflation and affordability top the list of priorities. The poll found that 47% of voters identified grocery costs as a key concern, followed by healthcare (34%) and rent or mortgage payments (31%). Republicans argue their legislation directly addressed those issues, while Democrats stood in the way.

The data also showed a shifting perception of which party “cares more about people like you.” Once a Democratic advantage, the metric is now nearly tied at 37–40, representing a ten-point swing toward Republicans since 2017.

Republicans are using the poll to sharpen their offensive strategy going into 2026. Their messaging playbook stresses “contrast framing,” casting GOP lawmakers as champions of tax relief and Democrats as tax-hikers aligned with Washington elites. “Stay on offense; this is the signature debate of 2026, and winning it means holding the majority,” the NRCC memo advises.

The Vasquez campaign has not yet responded to the NRCC’s claims. However, Democrats are likely to counter that the GOP’s proposals favor the wealthy and could threaten long-term fiscal stability, despite that not being the case. 

Vasquez narrowly reclaimed New Mexico’s Second District in 2024 after barely winning it two years earlier, making the seat one of the most closely watched swing districts in the nation. With Republicans already targeting him, the NRCC poll underscores just how competitive the 2026 race is likely to be.

Vasquez on the ropes after voting against biggest middle-class tax cut Read More »

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 89
Scroll to Top