Again, unfortunately for your non-point, Senators aren't there to represent political parties. They're there to represent the citizens of their state. Therefore "RINO" is a completely specious term.
I am the President of Asia and your argument is invalid.
In this instance to my "non-point", Romney is NOT representing the Great state of Utah, but, he is representing
himself, Pogo. Romney does not like Trump....period. It's a personal matter, and has been. And, yes he is a RINO, I would
have more respect for him if he was a Democrat.
Again --- that's up to the voters of Utah, not those of Idaho and not those cheering on political football teams.
The fact remains --- Senators are there to represent their state, not a political party. It's always been that way. If we were supposed to be run by political parties, our Constitution would have been written that way. It wasn't.
"RINO" is not a valid argument. It's invalid because it hangs on the premise that a Senator (or Rep, etc) is there to represent a political party. That premise is
provably false. If being a "Republican" or a "Democrat" or a "Whig" meant one was
compelled to vote as the party dick-tated, that would be a sham and an oligarchy.
Of course the other thing you could be saying with the term "RINO" is that Republicans (in this case) are supposed to be sheep who vote as their party tells them and screw their constituents. That's not good either.
If you live in Utah and your Senator doesn't represent your views, you have a legitimate beef. If you don't --- you don't. Simple as that.