The “Friendly Incumbent” Excuse: A Moving Target

Distraction: We only back incumbents who support property issues — that’s the ‘Friendly Incumbent Rule.’

Fact: This “rule” is used inconsistently. When convenient, it justifies endorsing anti-diversity candidates. When ignored, it’s abandoned without explanation. It’s a gaslighting tactic to excuse funding harmful politicians.

A Convenient “Rule”

Ask why RPAC is endorsing a controversial candidate and you’ll often hear:
“We’re just following the Friendly Incumbent Rule.”

But look closely: the so-called “rule” isn’t in RPAC’s bylaws or national guidelines. And even more troubling — it’s applied when convenient, and discarded when it isn’t.

How It Gets Used

When convenient: It becomes a shield for keeping endorsements flowing to incumbents, even when they oppose LGBTQ+ rights, immigrant protections, or gender equity.
When inconvenient: It gets quietly dropped so the PAC can endorse a challenger instead — with no explanation to members.

That’s not consistency. That’s gaslighting — moving the goalposts so REALTORS® feel like there’s a “policy,” when in reality, there’s just political calculation.

Why This Matters

REALTORS® deserve honesty. If a policy exists, it should be written, transparent, and consistently enforced. If it doesn’t exist, stop using it as an excuse.

Otherwise, it undermines trust in RPAC and fuels the perception that endorsements are driven more by politics than principles. And it leaves members feeling manipulated into supporting candidates who openly violate the spirit of Article 10 of our Code of Ethics.

The REALTOR® Standard

Article 10 demands nondiscrimination. It doesn’t say: “Apply only when convenient.”

If the Friendly Incumbent “rule” can be bent to excuse candidates who promote division and harm, then it’s not a rule at all. It’s a cover story.

The Bottom Line

Consistency builds trust. Inconsistency destroys it. REALTORS® should demand better: transparent standards, applied evenly — and a commitment to never endorse candidates whose platforms betray diversity, equity, and inclusion.