No debate, less daylight: Hobbs and Biggs keep voters at arm’s length

Gov. Katie Hobbs will not participate in a debate with Rep. Andy Biggs before November, according to the Arizona Capitol Times. Her campaign manager, Nicole DeMont, said in a statement that “face-to-face engagement with Arizonans is more effective than a stage designed for short soundbites and political theater.” The campaign says Hobbs will spend that time traveling the state instead.

The Capitol Times reported that some stops on what Hobbs calls her Arizona First Tour have been organized events with invited participants. Campaign press aide Michael Beyer said multiple events have been open to the public. The campaign highlighted meetings with restaurant owners about tariffs, a tour of Curry Seed & Chili Co. with farmer Ed Curry to discuss water security and agriculture, and even a National Drive-Thru Day stop at a Burger King where Hobbs once worked, which produced a photo of her under a sign reading “Home of the Whopper.”

The immediate consequence is straightforward. Without a traditional debate, Arizonans lose a direct, unscripted comparison of the two major candidates on the same stage taking the same questions. Biggs adviser Drew Sexton argued that “independent and persuadable voters up for grabs in Arizona deserve to hear from statewide candidates in a traditional debate setting,” and said Biggs will participate in an Oct. 6 debate organized by the Citizens Clean Elections Commission. It is unclear whether anyone else will be there, the Capitol Times reported. The same report also noted that Biggs refused to take part in debates in his 2022 and 2024 congressional races.

This is not a new posture for Hobbs either. The Capitol Times recounted that the last time she agreed to a debate was in October 2018, in her secretary of state race against Republican Steve Gaynor. She declined to debate Marco Lopez in the 2022 Democratic gubernatorial primary and also declined a general election debate with Republican Kari Lake. The outlet added that Hobbs has been ahead in polls, though no surveys have been published since Biggs won a four-way GOP primary.

Campaign-controlled events are not a substitute for a neutral format with equal time, direct rebuttals, and questions the candidates did not preselect. Listening sessions with invited participants can surface real concerns. They also allow a campaign to decide who is in the room and what gets asked. If Biggs now wants a Clean Elections forum while having skipped debates in past cycles, and Hobbs prefers curated stops to a side-by-side, the bipartisan trend is the same. The public vetting is thinner, the message control tighter.

Voter motivation in 2026 will hinge on more than stagecraft. A new survey described by the Arizona Mirror found that abortion remains a deciding issue in three battleground states that include Arizona. The research, conducted by Impact Research in partnership with Reproductive Freedom for All, suggested that abortion access may not mobilize voters unless they hear more about threats to it. Impact Research frequently works with progressive organizations, as the Mirror noted, which is context voters should know when weighing the findings.

If the survey’s top-line takeaway is right, campaigns have an incentive to focus on narrative and control. Traditional debates force candidates to explain policy specifics, costs, and tradeoffs under time pressure and rebuttal. Organized events let campaigns spotlight what they prefer, repeat a message, and minimize friction. When one of the cycle’s central issues can turn on how threats are framed, the strategic draw of controlled formats is obvious. The public interest in at least one neutral, unscripted forum is just as obvious.

Process clarity should not stop with candidates. The Arizona Mirror also reported that the Department of Homeland Security said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not planning an aggressive campaign at voting sites during the upcoming midterm elections. DHS offered that assurance in response to a States Newsroom inquiry about a letter from U.S. Senate Democrats. Voters deserve clear, public guidance on law enforcement posture near polling places before ballots go out, not in the fog of rumor during early voting.

None of this is about scoring points for one party. It is about testable claims in public. If Biggs plans to attend the Clean Elections Commission debate, good. He should commit to taking unscripted questions in additional settings as well. If Hobbs believes in face-to-face engagement, the most credible proof is to show up on a neutral stage, take the same questions as her opponent, and let Arizonans decide who answered better. Controlled backdrops and friendly rooms are not a sufficient audit of a candidate seeking a four-year mandate.

Arizona’s voters have done hard civic work for several cycles running. They have sat through lawsuits, audits, and recriminations. They can handle a real debate. Candidates who want trust should submit to formats that reduce message control and increase accountability. One open, time-limited, moderator-led forum with equal rules is a low bar. Meet it, then go back to the burger counters and farm tours. Voters deserve both the retail and the reality check.

See an error? Email corrections@saguarosignal.com. We append material corrections to the article.