DISTRACTION: “We can’t endorse a pro-diversity candidate in a red state. We have to back the person we know will win.”

FACT: The purpose of endorsements is not to pick winners — it’s to uphold REALTOR® values.

---

For years, members have been told that in certain states, backing a pro-diversity candidate is a waste of resources because “they can’t win.” Instead, RPAC dollars are funneled toward incumbents or “safe bets” — even when those candidates openly oppose LGBTQ+ rights, immigrant rights, women’s rights, or DEI initiatives. This rationale doesn’t just undermine our credibility; it undermines our ethics.

The REALTOR® Code of Ethics — specifically Article 10 — requires us to oppose discrimination in all forms. That obligation doesn’t vanish in a red state or a blue one. When RPAC endorses anti-diversity candidates under the excuse of electability, it communicates that winning matters more than integrity. It tells marginalized communities that their rights are negotiable.

Endorsements should be about setting a standard, not chasing poll numbers. REALTORS® have the power — and the responsibility — to elevate candidates who reflect our commitment to fair housing, equal opportunity, and inclusive communities. Even in places where victory feels unlikely, endorsements send a clear message about what we stand for. They shape public discourse, inspire future candidates, and prove that REALTOR® values aren’t for sale.

The real question isn’t “Can they win?” It’s “Do they represent our values?” If the answer is no, then our money and endorsements should not follow them.

We don’t have to fund candidates who betray Article 10 just because they’re favored to win. Our duty is to fairness, not foregone conclusions.