Talk:Dennis Chávez

Removed Election Controversy section

I removed this from the page for two reasons:

1. These elections were controversial, but Chavez's opponents were frequently the ones involved in voter fraud. This must be edited to include this point. All of New Mexico had a deeply entrenched PATRON system that Chavez fought against (but also participated in), and many election reforms came out of the state including the famous Hatch Act.
2. He not only subsequently won the 1952 election... he went on to win the 1958 election as well. He may have been a target for a moment, but Chavez quickly regained the confidence of his constituents.

Once someone has edited this passage for clarity, I will replace it on the site.

Election Controversy

It was widely believed at the time that he was responsible for rigging his re-elections in 1946 and 1952. Both elections were won very narrowly by Chávez, and there was such rampant speculation of voter fraud in the 1946 election, it caused his popularity to fall significantly. This lead many New Mexicans to believe that it would not have been possible for him to win in 1952 without rigging the election. It was never proven that any election fraud took place, but the irregularities in the two elections could never explained either.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.42.155.31 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

All of New Mexico had a deeply entrenched PATRON system that Chavez fought against (but also participated in), and many election reforms came out of the state including the famous Hatch Act. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.35.126.6 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Role in Roswell Incident cover-up

Shouldn't his intimidation of Walt Whitmore Jr. -- part of the Roswell Incident cover-up -- be mentioned? (Details can be found in the bullet point for Walt Whitmore Jr. at Witness accounts of the Roswell UFO incident#Accounts of intimidation.) -John Rigali (talk) 03:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Problems

• The article is unreferenced. The source of individual facts presented is unclear and difficult to verify. see Wikipedia:Footnotes-----Adimovk5 (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I added a reference. --evrik ^(talk) 14:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
• The tone reads more like a fan page. Praise should be delivered as quotes or otherwise referenced not presented as if they are facts. This needs to be reworked to be more like an encyclopedia article.-----Adimovk5 (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)