Recent polling shows the race for New Hampshire governor between Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte and Democrat Cinde Warmington is competitive.
Ayotte is in a confident position: New Hampshire governors rarely lose their first reelection campaign, and after a first term defined by a willingness to challenge her party and use her veto pen, she’s remained relatively popular.
Meanwhile, Warmington hopes that record-low approval of President Trump and voters’ concerns about the economy will help her case. That is, if she can successfully fend off Ayotte’s attacks for her past work for companies that helped fuel the opioid crisis.
As NHPR’s Josh Rogers put it, as the campaign enters its home stretch, the outcome may hinge on what middle-of-the-road voters find least distasteful: Trump’s record, or Warmington’s. He joined NHPR’s All Things Considered host Julia Barnett to talk about the race.
Below is a transcript of their conversation, which has been lightly edited.
Despite being at the top of the ticket in New Hampshire this November, this race has been pretty low-key. Why?
There are a few reasons. A big one is the reality that NH governors very rarely lose their first reelection campaign. It’s only happened twice in the last 100 years, and not since 2004.
The unpopularity of President Trump is a hurdle for any Republican. So is the tough economy. There are some local issues as well — including management failures at the state’s youth detention center, and the current disarray at the State Supreme Court.
Democrats point to those as vulnerabilities for Ayotte, but it’s hard to see vast numbers of voters honing in on them. And even if they did, would it translate into voters seeing Ayotte as unfit to continue holding office?
Ayotte and her campaign, meanwhile, are continuing to make that case that Warmington is unfit to serve due to her past work lobbying for Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, and her legal work for a now-defunct chain of pain clinics. These aren’t new arguments, they were also used against Warmington in her 2024 run for governor.
What’s important to know about Warmington’s record?
It’s hard to say how potent this is as a campaign issue, but the Ayotte campaign seems to believe they can disqualify Warmington on this front and that will be that.
The facts are this: Warmington was hired by Purdue back in 2001 to fight a requirement that would make it harder for doctors to prescribe OxyContin. At the time, Warmington touted OxyContin as a "miracle drug” that had been “abused” in media coverage.
There is also the issue of Warmington’s later legal work for a chain of pain clinics known as PainCare, a major prescriber of opioid painkillers across New Hampshire. The clinics were owned by Dr. Michael O'Connell, who surrendered his medical license over engaging in allegedly improper sexual relationships with clients. Warmington helped O'Connell broker the resolution to that case.
Meanwhile, a PainCare physician assistant went to prison for taking kickbacks in return for prescribing fentanyl. That criminal conduct took place in 2013 and 2014, when Warmington was the clinic's lawyer.
Warmington has had plenty of time to hone her explanations for this part of her record. What does she say?
On the Purdue front, Warmington says it was a long time ago and that she was misled.
On the PainCare front, she says she was a lawyer representing a client. But her relationship with Dr. Michael O’Connell, who is now dead, went beyond legal work. O’Connell was also a major political benefactor, who gave Warmington thousands in her past runs for office.
One thing Warmington is trying to do to flip this issue is point to Ayotte’s record on Opioids. Warmington and her allies argue that as Attorney General, Ayotte failed the state by not joining 26 states in a 2018 lawsuit against Purdue.
They also say that Ayotte complaints about Warmington’s lobbying work for the drug maker are hypocritical since she’s never raised any issues with Republicans who performed legal work for the company, and that Ayotte herself gladly accepted campaign donations from the Sackler family, who owned Purdue when she was a US Senator.
Is there any evidence that these arguments are helping to neutralize this issue for Warmington?
It’s hard to say. I’ve heard numerous Democrats who support Warmington make these arguments, but Ayotte’s campaign is clearly eager to fight on this ground.
They have the far simpler message: A former AG who has leaned into public safety issues as Governor, versus someone who once touted Oxycontin as a miracle drug. That’s a matchup they like.
The bigger question — and really the premise of the Warmington candidacy — is that other forces, like the cost of living and the unpopularity of Donald Trump, will end up driving voters’ decisions.
