New Mexico Governor 2026: the ads, and who's paying for them
Deb Haaland (Democrat) and Gregg Hull (Republican) are the candidates for governor of New Mexico in the November 3, 2026 general election. Semblen has analyzed 55 ads in this race; 35 used at least one manipulation technique, most often glittering generalities and false urgency.
Deb Haaland (DEM), Gregg Hull (REP).
On the ballot as listed by Ballotpedia. 55 ads analyzed, 35 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing. Updated 2026-10-08.
34 of 52 (65%) flagged · Glittering Generalities (27), False Urgency (12), Appeal to Fear (8)
YouTube
1 of 3 flagged · Flag-Waving (1), Glittering Generalities (1), Loaded Language (1)
Reported Meta spend
$352,600–437,586 on all ads, $164,000–202,985 on flagged ads · Meta reports ranges; these are the sums of their ends
Example
“build a better future for working families” — Glittering Generalities, paid for by Deb for New Mexico
· the flagged ad with the highest reported spend that shows the most common technique
Embed this race on your site
A small box with these findings and the newest ads, updated as new ads are analyzed. Free for newsrooms, blogs and campaigns alike; it links back here.
Follow Deb Haaland vs. Gregg Hull
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
All from the campaign; no ads here from groups placed on this side.
Read this before comparing the sides. Ads that attack an opponent use these techniques far more often than ads that introduce a candidate, whoever runs them, so the side running more attack ads shows a higher share. A technique is about wording, not about whether an ad is true. These are online ads only (Meta and YouTube), not television.
Appeal to Fear (1), Card Stacking (1), Loaded Language (1)
How a group is placed: by its own filings with the Federal Election Commission. A group is with a candidate when it reported spending to support that candidate, or to oppose the other one in the general election. The parties' own committees are with their nominee. Spending against a candidate in a primary places a group nowhere, and neither does our reading of its ads: a group with no such filing is listed as not placed. The sponsor table gives the reason for each.
Decide what counts
Not everyone would call every technique manipulation. Untick the ones you'd call ordinary persuasion and the count updates.
64% of the 55 ads here use at least one of the techniques ticked below (35 ads).
Leaving out the softer ones (loaded language, glittering generalities, slogans, exaggeration, repetition): 51% of ads.
Semblen is free to read and has no ads. If this page was useful, you can support it.
Money in this race
Candidates for governor report their fundraising to New Mexico's state campaign-finance office, not the FEC. This page doesn't cover those reports yet, so it shows no money figures.
The ads
55 ads, newest first. Video transcripts are shown as the model read them, without caption cues like [music].
Showing the 1 ad paid for by Democratic Party of NM (not authorized by any candidate). Show all 55 ads
Paid for by Democratic Party of NM (not authorized by any candidate)from 2026-10-02spend $100–19910,000–14,999 impressions
Gregg Hull is making his priorities clear: backing Donald Trump's extreme cuts to SNAP, Medicaid, and universal childcare to secure Trump's endorsement.
If elected governor, Hull promises to bring those same devastating cuts directly to New Mexico, putting essential healthcare and food assistance at risk for tens of thousands of working families. New Mexico doesn't need its own Donald Trump in the Roundhouse.
Watch DPNM's new digital ad, "New Mexico's Trump," to see what is at stake.
Loaded Language: The word 'extreme' is used to emotionally charge the description of the cuts, framing them negatively rather than neutrally — for example: 'extreme cuts'
Name Calling: Framing Hull's actions as purely transactional and self-serving implies he is a political opportunist rather than engaging with the substance of his positions — for example: 'to secure Trump's endorsement'
Card Stacking: The sentence presents Hull's motivations as solely about securing an endorsement, omitting any other possible rationale for his policy positions, selectively framing his intent — for example: "backing Donald Trump's extreme cuts to SNAP, Medicaid, and universal childcare to secure Trump's endorsement".
Appeal to Fear: The sentence warns of dire consequences for vulnerable populations to provoke anxiety and opposition to Hull — for example: 'putting essential healthcare and food assistance at risk for tens of thousands of working families'
Loaded Language
Name Calling
Card Stacking
Appeal to Fear
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it ran mostly in NM and names a nominee for governor — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office (a U.S. Senate or House campaign included), or it also names NM's Senate nominees, in which case it is on the Senate race's page. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
The candidates are the ones certified for the November ballot, from the source linked at the top. Governors are state offices, so there are no FEC filings behind this page: no money figures, and outside groups are placed on a side only when they are a campaign or a party committee.
Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
A technique is a specific manipulative move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. The check runs once and its result is shown to everyone afterwards. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.
Get notified as this improves — new detection models, the browser
extension, and new features. Occasional email, no spam.
Semblen LLC · 5900 Balcones Drive STE 100, Austin, TX 78731 · unsubscribe any time