You may not have noticed, but both the Democratic and Republican primaries for New Hampshire governor are on Tuesday, Sept. 11.

In fairness to both citizens and candidates, the media has not paid a lot of attention. Olympic coverage dominated early August. The candidates just could not compete with Michael Phelps, Ally Raisman, the women’s soccer and water polo teams, men’s and women’s basketball, and all the rest of those amazing athletes.

There also was competition from the presidential election. Mitt Romney’s tax returns, Mitt Romney’s comments about the Olympics, Mitt Romney’s horse, Mitt Romney’s falling poll numbers didn’t leave a lot of ink for local candidates. The breathless coverage of Romney’s selection of his running mate didn’t help, as air time went to pundits asking each other ad nauseum if Paul Ryan was a “game changer.” Mitt should hope not. The last “game changer” was Sarah Palin, whose selection did not change the game, but was instead the final error sealing victory for Barack Obama.

With less than a month to go, however, it is time to focus on New Hampshire’s gubernatorial primaries.

Republican candidates Ovide Lamontagne and Kevin Smith are depressingly similar. Neither one wants to talk about “social” issues, even though they are both best known for their outside-the-mainstream positions on “social issues.”

Smith was the executive director of Cornerstone Action, an organization which vigorously lobbied the Legislature to impose a right wing social agenda on New Hampshire. Now that he is running for governor, Smith says on his web site, that he supports the traditional definition of marriage, but would have a “civil” dialogue with those who have differing views. What does that mean? That he would smile when signing the repeal bill?

Ovide has lost three prior elections for higher office. He prefers that the state not accept federal money for education. If Ovide has his way, cities and towns will either have to raise local property taxes or cut support for education. The impact on communities like Manchester and Nashua would be devastating.

Republicans looking for a reliable ally for Bill O’Brien and his extreme agenda can be assured that either Kevin or Ovide will work out quite nicely.

On the Democratic side, former state senators Maggie Hassan and Jackie Cilley are the leading candidates (full disclosure: I have endorsed Hassan). They agree on a lot of issues, too, although in the Legislature they did part ways on a couple of bills, such as Hassan’s support of a ban on smoking in restaurants and an end to high-interest rate payday loans.

Their biggest area of disagreement is that Hassan has pledged to veto a sales or income tax, while Cilley says she thinks we need to have a discussion about taxes.

I’m not sure why Jackie says we need a discussion that includes a sales or an income tax during this election year. We have been discussing taxes in New Hampshire for about 50 years. Whenever Democrats have this discussion during an election year, the results are not pretty. Democratic nominees for governor who refuse to say they will veto a sales or an income tax lose, and typically the rest of the ticket takes it on the chin as well.

A couple of Democrats who support Cilley have reminded me that Jeanne Shaheen was elected to a third term without taking the pledge. Unlike the current candidates, however, Shaheen had built up a statewide well of good will during her first two terms. Even then, she was elected with only a plurality of the vote.

When Democrats recognize that New Hampshire’s economy is built around not having a sales or an income tax, Democrats do pretty well. Jeanne Shaheen trounced Ovide Lamontagne and Jay Lucas when she took the pledge in 1996 and 1998, while John Lynch won election four times.

Despite all this history, Democrats occasionally nominate a candidate who does not pledge to veto a sales or an income tax. Democratic candidates are then crushed in November.

I hope this is not one of those years. The Republican Party has moved so far to the right in New Hampshire that if there is both a Republican governor and legislature, we will lose a lot of what makes New Hampshire a special place. Our public education system will be undermined. Property taxes will continue to rise as more and more costs are downshifted to local communities. The government will interfere with fundamentally private decisions such as birth control and marriage. Hopefully, Democrats will realize that the stakes are too high, and we cannot afford to take chances in this election by walking off the broad-based cliff.

Kathy Sullivan is a Manchester attorney and member of the Democratic National Committee. She was chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party from 1999-2007. Follow her on Twitter @NHKathySullivan.