Update: See below for additional comments by Lois Anderson, ORTL executive director.
For the first time in almost a decade, one of Oregon’s congressional seats is open. Currently held by Rep. Greg Walden, Oregon’s Second Congressional District (CD 2) is Oregon’s only Republican seat in Congress. Congressman Walden has been a reliable pro-life vote in Congress and it is crucial that his replacement is pro-life.
The entry of a formidable, self-described “100% pro-choice” candidate, Knute Buehler, into the race made a sole endorsement by ORTL PAC necessary. The importance of supporting one pro-life candidate has been demonstrated in past elections. Without a show of unity behind one candidate, Buehler will win.
After an extensive process of research and discussion, the Oregon Right to Life PAC board has endorsed Jimmy Crumpacker. Jimmy has demonstrated over the past months that he is the pro-life candidate who will win.
“I know what a difficult decision this will be for many voters, because there is more than one dedicated pro-life candidate,” says Lois Anderson, ORTL executive director. “We must be clear-eyed and focused on what is best for protecting the vulnerable and assuring a pro-life voice and vote in Congress.”
Anderson added, “I urge all pro-life voters in the Second Congressional District to unify behind Jimmy. I have confidence that he will be the congressional pro-life advocate Oregon needs to help us reestablish protection of innocent human life from conception to natural death.”
The relentless squabbling in our blog post comments has brought us to an unfortunate decision of turning off the comments. We are willing to respond to those who are open-minded and have genuine questions. Please use our contact box here and select “Political Action Committee.”
The comments have been full of what pro-abortion elements in Oregon politics want. They want pro-life voters to fight with each other rather than unite against pro-abortion candidates.
Rather than express respectful disagreement and support for one’s own preferred candidate, many have chosen to harass and rage at Oregon Right to Life over our endorsement decision.
Let me be clear, there are multiple sincere, pro-life candidates running in this primary. Unfortunately, only one candidate can win. And all of the pro-life candidates are up against a formidable, pro-choice opponent, Knute Buehler.
We take this race so seriously that we have invested $250,000 in our No on Knute campaign. Endorsing the candidate with the best opportunity to win reflects our singular goal of defeating Knute Buehler and electing a congressman who will vote to protect the most vulnerable–unborn babies.
Buehler has raised more than 1 million dollars so far. The demonstrated ability to raise sufficient dollars to get your name in front of voters is crucial. Knute Buehler, of course, is leading the race due to his substantial war chest. Jimmy Crumpacker is in second place.
Our endorsement decision was reached after months of data gathering, discussion, and sincere reflection by our PAC board.
I recognize that politics are difficult and stir up a lot of passion and emotion. My team and I welcome honest, sincere questions, but we will not provide a public platform for divisive behavior and language.
–Lois Anderson, ORTL Executive Director
Hi Gary,
I appreciate your thoughtful consideration in this important race. I will send you an email response.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Cecilia. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Mike. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Annette. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Cathe. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Lynn. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, James. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Sue. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, John. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Ron. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Kathy. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Rep. Findley. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Wendy. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Curts. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Sue. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
After reading all of the comments above, it seems to me that you should post something publicly point-by-point about why you endorsed this new candidate. I truly don’t know the difference between all of them, but it does seem as if you need to explain yourself. I understand this was a very hard decision for you, therefore you ought to make clear exact points for choosing Jimmy. Thank you for your consideration of this.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Steve. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Rod. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Alan. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Roni. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, John. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this important campaign, Jennifer. I will email you a response to the points you have raised.
It’s only telling in that there was a social media campaign to come make comments here.
Here’s our explanation that we sent individually to ensure the explanation got to the people asking:
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Not to disparage Mr. Crumpacker nor contribute to discord among Oregon’s pro-life community, but my family engaged Cliff Bentz to help settle a complex ranch division, and all sides were impressed with his wisdom and diplomacy. He is invested in Oregon and all its citizens. We are fortunate to have a number of pro-life candidates, but I would choose Cliff Bentz.
Thank you for such a calm expression of your position! We have had a lot of good experiences with Cliff as well. Unfortunately, not nearly enough CD 2 voters have. He is far behind Buehler (and Crumpacker) in the poll. By all means, vote for him but know that a vote for Bentz is wasted and essentially a vote for Buehler. If only Knute hadn’t entered the race! Then we could have done a three-way endorsement and let the best pro-life candidate win.
But above all: we cannot be stuck with a 100% pro-abortion congressional delegate. Which is exactly what a split vote will give everyone in Oregon and especially everyone in CD 2.
You all better unite on a candidate or Buehler will eat your lunch! I want a pro-life representative….let’s get together on the candidate….
I am really surprised you didn’t endorse Cliff Bentz. He seemed like a natural for the ORTL. Based upon my information about the candidates he seemed to be the clear choice.
We wish we could but Cliff just doesn’t have recognition with voters in the majority of CD 2, outside his local community. He is up against a tremendously dangerous opponent in Knute Buehler. We paid for a poll that revealed he is third, well behind Crumpacker, who is behind Knute Buehler.
Here’s the rest of the information:
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Form replies are not helping your case, unfortunately. Given the response, it might be wise to simply share publicly whatever this email is that you’ve been sending that addresses further points.
Happy to! Just wanting to make sure that people see the reply (the WordPress notifications go to junk mail regularly).
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
I would appreciate hearing the reasons for this decision, Cliff Bentz sounds like a good candidate to me.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler.
So, what ARE the points for backing Crumpacker and not Bentz or Atkinson? This is not my district, but I would like to know why people are upset. Please give me the rundown.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler.
Hope that helps! The comments of a few who are deeply connected to chosen candidates certainly do not represent the whole picture.
Thank you for making this decision. It is obvious that we need a single candidate that can take on and win against the left. Having multiple candidates will only serve to negate each other and assure that the left wins again. I know it was a tough choice, but the responses here show me that my theory is true. The right will continue to turn against each other, while the left stands in unity. You have poured your lives into fighting for the lives of these innocent children. Those who would attack you when you make a stand really never understood who and what you are and what you stand for and that you deserve praise, not ridicule. It’s not like standing against Nike or Pepsi. It’s standing against an organization that is called to save lives. If people have a problem with that, they need to check themselves and where their heart really is. God bless you.
Thanks for your support, Dave. We appreciate you! We also appreciate the passion being expressed by all the people who disagree. It may be misguided because of lack of information but passion for local politics is important!
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Also, Deborah, it’s personally very disappointing that you would threaten to go out of your way to damage Oregon’s only pro-life advocacy group because you disagree about a sole endorsement we have made (after months of careful research and reflection).
Nope, the only people all but guaranteeing Knute the nomination are Cliff Bentz and Jason Atkinson. The polls show they have no chance of beating Knute but they persist, splitting the vote among their supporters.
Crumpacker is already #2 in the polls. A vote for anyone but him guarantees Buehler the nomination.
Then you and your conservative friends will receive Knute Buehler as a congressman. It’s that simple.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
The allegation that our endorsement was “purchased” is ridiculous and unfounded. We take our jobs seriously. We exist not to hand out endorsements based on personal relationships but to help pro-life advocates get elected. An endorsement of anyone but Crumpacker would have gotten Buehler elected. And that’s something we all agree on: No on Knute.
Neither did President Trump when he ran for office.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
President Trump also had no record but had the capacity to beat the formidable Hilary Clinton. Endorsements come after many things are weighed. When there is a race with no pro-choice candidate, we are able to issue endorsements to all the pro-life candidates and “let the best one win.”
Knute Buehler robbed us of that. Then we had to ascertain pro-life views of the remaining candidates. Four survived that test. Next, in order to defeat Buehler, we had to figure out which campaign had the ability to overtake him in the polls. Ultimately, we polled CD 2 voters to see who had the largest percentage of name recognition after Buehler. Jimmy Crumpacker did. Our endorsement is important but it cannot overcome lack of name recognition, an experience re-proven by the last Republican gubernatorial race when we endorse Greg Woolridge, a fantastic candidate and advocate but with not enough name recognition to defeat Knute Buehler.
We will NOT lose another primary to Knute Buehler again if we can help it.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Early in this primary election our PAC Board recognized the danger Knute Buehler–a well known, well funded pro-choice candidate–would pose. For that reason, our goal has been from the beginning to make a sole-endorsement in this race in order to avoid splitting the vote between multiple candidates.
Part of the problem is that people have already split the vote. Half of the upset advocates are backing Cliff Bentz and the other half are backing Jason Atkinson. Even if we had chosen one of those men, the other half would have been upset. People feel deeply loyal to candidates especially when they are from smaller, close-knit communities.
The problem with both men is that they lack name recognition (a key component to winning) and don’t have the ability to increase their name recognition enough in the time they have (by May 19) to defeat Knute who far outstrips them in the polls. Crumpacker is already second in the polls AND has the ability to outstrip Buehler. He’s also an incredibly solid pro-life advocate which is the primary issue we concern ourselves with.
Comments are closed.