KJZZ’s Friday NewsCap revisits some of the biggest stories of the week from Arizona and beyond.
To talk about a change atop the state Democratic party, results from this week’s primaries in the 7th Congressional District and more, The Show sat down with Barrett Marson of Marson Media and Mike Haener of Lumen Strategies.
Full conversation
MARK BRODIE: Mike, let me start with you on CD7. This is the primary race to replace the late Congressman Raul Grijalva on the Democratic side. His daughter, Adelita Grijalva, won. On the Republican side, Daniel Butierez was the winner.
There had been some talk about maybe Deja Foxx, who’s a social media influencer with a little bit of political background, maybe having a chance to win that primary. Ultimately, Grijalva won that by, I think, 40-some-odd points. Was the margin surprising to you?
MIKE HAENER: A little bit? The Grijalva name, obviously, has been on a ballot in southern Arizona for 40 years. And so I think the campaigns over the years, the get-out-the-vote efforts, all of the things that Congressman Grijalva had done and his daughter had done led to this victory. And it was by a very significant margin.
BRODIE: Does the margin surprise you all, Barrett?
BARRETT MARSON: They don’t call it the “Grijalva machine” for nothing. The margin did a little bit surprise me. I don’t think I bought into the national media’s obsession with Deja Foxx.
I think probably a lot of her followers, supporters — in fact, the vast, vast majority of them — don’t live anywhere near CD7. You know, they live in Minnesota and maybe Brooklyn, New York, but not CD7. So, she certainly raised a lot of money, certainly got a high profile, but did not in any way turn the votes for her.
BRODIE: I want to ask Mike also about Daniel Hernandez, who came in third, but also came into this race — I am not in that district, but he seems like he would have maybe the second highest name ID. I mean, the Hernandez name in southern Arizona, they’ve been involved in politics for a while. He’s been in the Legislature. He ran for Congress before. He came in a distant third in this race.
HAENER: Yeah. Again, it’s difficult because legislative races are so small and so targeted to a very few number of voters that when you expand outside that realm, it becomes much more difficult, and your name ID isn’t what you expect it to be.
Even if you’ve run for Congress in a district similar to that a number of years ago, it just doesn’t translate. And the memory of voters to say, “Oh, I remember that name from this district or from this race a couple years ago” is very difficult because people are trying to just live their lives.
MARSON: I mean, even your learned and scholared listeners, many of them would be hard pressed to figure out who their legislator was. They could probably tell you their congressman is, but many — not all, but many — would be hard pressed to tell you who their legislator was.
And I just think the name Grijalva has rung out since you were in short pants. It was too much of a hill to climb for just about anybody, but certainly a former state legislator.
MARK BRODIE: So Barrett, given the margin of Grijalva’s victory here — and, of course, this is a special election. She’ll have to run again, assuming that she wins, in the fall, which she should because it’s a pretty Democratic district.
MARSON: You know, Trump is really going to work hard on this one.
BRODIE: Given the margin, do you imagine that sort of maybe insulates her from a primary challenge next year when she has to run for the full term?
MARSON: I can’t imagine anyone serious taking her on that. That would be a fool’s errand.
BRODIE: Would you agree with that, Mike?
HAENER: A hundred percent. I mean, there may be some gadfly that decides, “This is my time,” but she’s going to win reelection after she wins election in the fall.
MARSON: I mean, this is going to be a Grijalva seat for maybe three generations. You know, two to three generations, easy.
HAENER: Yup.
BRODIE: Mike, I want to ask you about using this race — because Barrett brought up all the national attention, and there were comparisons between Deja Foxx and (U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) and (mayoral candidate Zohran) Mamdani in New York Is this the future of the Democratic Party?
It seemed like on policy, both Grijalva and Foxx are fairly progressive. They both call themselves progressive, their policies. It didn’t seem like there was an awful lot of daylight between them. I wonder if there’s anything to be said about what this race and the results on the Democratic side mean for the Democratic Party, or is it just this is somebody who everybody in that district knows, her father held the seat forever and, as we heard her say, all politics is local?
HAENER: That’s 100% correct. All politics is local. The family’s been in that district for more than 40 years. From supervisor races to school board races to city races. And this has nothing to do with national politics in any way, shape or form. This is district 7 in Tucson, and you can end it there.
MARSON: Yeah, I do absolutely agree with that. I don’t think there’s any lesson to be learned from the CD7 race this year, because it just really was a look at the Grijalva name.
BRODIE: Mike, let me ask you about another election that took place this week, this one just among Democrats. And it was to oust the party chair, Robert Branscomb, who was just elected in a landslide to that post about six months ago.
It was not a smooth tenure for Mr. Branscomb atop the state Democratic Party. I’m curious what you make of all the machinations and ultimately the vote to oust him.
HAENER: I don’t think it really means anything. The average voter in Arizona — Democrat, Republican, independent, Green, Libertarian, whatever you want to be — probably couldn’t tell you who that chair of their party is or what their actual structure of the party does. They vote for candidates.
We’ve seen this on the Republican side with them bypassing the state party and going to Yuma a number of years ago. Doug Ducey won election handily when that happened. It’s irrelevant in the big scheme of things who the party chair is. It’s all about the behind the scenes, raising money and all that other stuff that matters. And the next person needs to be able to do that type of stuff.
MARSON: You know one thing I’m a little jealous of? Democrats nipped this in the bud in six months. Whereas when there was all this mishegas with the state Republican Party, we were a ride or die with Kellie Ward until we went off the cliff. And so at least they nipped in the bud, and now maybe they’ll get someone with a heartbeat into that position. I don’t know. No one really wants it, it seems like.
BRODIE: That seems to be the issue, right Mike? Who would want this job? They’re going to be walking into what seems like a pretty messy situation.
HAENER: Well, again, all you need to do is have the backing of the elected officials, have the correct staff. And this job isn’t that difficult. But again, in the world of politics today, how many people actually want to be involved in any of it?
MARSON: Absolutely no one. And I absolutely agree with Mike: Nobody knows who the party chairman is in the public. This is all about sort of the grassroots. But also, parties are supposed to raise money and register voters. So far, Democrats have not been able to do that over the last couple of years. I mean, they’re at a huge deficit on voter registration.
HAENER: Definitely a huge voter registration issue. But from a raising money standpoint, obviously they competed well financially in the last cycle. Results weren’t as great. Obviously, Sen. Gallego won. They lost a couple of seats in the Legislature, but it was nowhere near as bad as it could have been.
And again, I think the money is going to be fine. It’s the voter registration issue that’s a problem.
BRODIE: But Barrett, the money doesn’t seem to be fine now though, right?
MARSON: And that’s a great rallying cry, “It wasn’t as bad as it could have been.” Look the Democratic Party finances are bad, but I think the money will be there, whether it’s Navajo County, the state Democratic Party.
Again, to Mike’s point earlier, Doug Ducey — and for that matter, John McCain — when they each diverted money to the Yuma County party, the Yuma County Republican Party did a great job, and they were the richest county party in the entire country. They were just getting funneled millions of dollars, and they were doing the work of the state Republican Party.
So did people in Kingman go, “Why is Yuma County Republican Party messaging to me?” No, they didn’t. And so it really doesn’t matter. The structure, it just is a little bit — it’s mishegas, and we in the political world love it. But in the real world, nobody cares.
BRODIE: So Barrett, if you are a Republican candidate for one of the statewide offices, is this the kind of thing where you look at it and maybe you think, “OK, the Democratic Party is kind of going through some now”?
But as you say, when Ducey and McCain went through Yuma, they still won. So maybe if you’re the Republicans, don’t let this be a distraction. Don’t take your foot off the gas just because the Democrats are going through Navajo County instead of the state party.
MARSON: Right. And, look, it’s messaging, right? It’s what are Democrats standing for and what are Republicans standing for? And that is what will win elections, not who the party chairman is or what structure it is. It is the messaging. And right now Democrats don’t have great messaging.
And we’re going to see — I mean, it’s gosh, it’s a year and a half to the next election. I mean, that is a lifetime, and Lord only knows what will happen. But right now, Republicans are winning on the messaging side.
HAENER: I think you’re right, the messaging matters. But also that the economy matters. And as we start to see some of the effects of the tariffs, some of the effects of cuts, some of the things that are happening kind of underground in the economy, that’s also going to play a large role into what the messaging actually is. And, and I think that’s going to have a great influence on the outcome of the 2022 election.
MARSON: There were two things that drove 2024: the economy and then illegal immigration. And Trump has done well on stanching the flow of border crossers. And then obviously everyone can argue about sort of the interior enforcement.
But the economy, Trump really does have to watch that. And of course, Epstein.
BRODIE: All these years later, still the economy, stupid.
