I did kind of laugh at this knee-jerk boiler-plate, in Romney’s particular case.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/02/05/the-one-tweet-that-captures-why-mitt-romney-is-totally-wrong-fro-betraying-trump-and-the-gop-n2560829

Except that he’s not. Donald Trump Jr. cited a damning Twitter thread by Gregory T. Angelo who noted the years of flip-flopping by Romney, exposing him as the guy who just wants to be invited to the cocktail parties.

Actually, there is, and I thought quite seriously about that last night.

There has been a lot of grousing about Romney’s religious principles being a cover for some less than admirable personal motives, and maybe that is true — I don’t claim to know, and no one else does either.

First conservative principle on exhibit:
We just fought a three-year battle with the Democrats over the distinction, legally and politically, between the actual things that President (and even candidate) Trump DID, and what they claimedhe was thinking when he did it. They would even oppose things he did that they formerly approved of, because of “seeing into” his mind and motives.

Criticize the optics of Romney’s vote, and its almost tangible political consequences, all you want: I’ll join in.
But I won’t reach into someone else’s heart to try and discern their “real” reasons.

Second conservative principle on exhibit:
I’ve put money into Jack Phillips’ funds for fighting the court battles that erupted over the wedding cake ambush; some of you have too. We are defending his right to practice his religious principles even if that looks like what other people choose to call “discrimination” — it isn’t — and his battle is not the only one being fought in the courts of law and social media.

However, to turn around and castigate Romney, or anyone else, for voting according to his personal interpretation of his personal religious principles is not a very conservative thing to do.

We cannot, as conservatives, champion an ideological value only when we approve of the results.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1225422247751495681.html

This isn’t some abstract discussion. This isn’t a daydream about how you wish somebody else ran a better race in 2016, or 2012. This is here and now, real life, with enormous stakes and consequences. The salient fact about Trump isn’t that he’s imperfect. It’s that he’s THERE.
There is no respectable “conservative principle” in helping the Dems with their ridiculous impeachment sham. There isn’t even a decent conservative principle in setting up all future presidents of all parties to get impeached by the opposition for subjective “abuse of power.”
And there most certainly isn’t some chattering-class “principle” that’s worth condemning America to rule by socialists to score some kind of pissy little point against Donald Trump. Nobody wants to read your True Conservative case for putting Bernie Sanders in the Oval Office.
Trump did a good job of laying out the principles that really matter in his SOTU. He provided a list of everything the Dems will destroy if they get the chance. Mitt Romney did what he could to help them get their chance. There isn’t a damn thing conservative about it. /end

The tactics will need rethinking, though.” – McCarthy (at The Hill, h/t Barry & PowerLine)

RTWT – it’s really kind of scary to think about.

Humans mostly make decisions from their hearts, emotionally, then use their brains to rationalize those decisions. With words to claim the decision was based on reason, when it was really based on emotion. Mittens is no better.
* * *
Also ditto.
I suspect, based on his history with Trump, there was a lot of confirmation bias operating here.

“Proper” is not the same as legal or constitutional. Nevertheless the US Constitution is quite clear, both before and after the 17th amendment, that senators are chosen for a term of six years. The only exception is that either the House or the Senate may expel one of its members on a two-thirds vote.