RINOs are republicans in name only. As such they needs to act against Republican principles of personal responsibility, self-reliance, pro-constitution, and so on.
People voting yes to the omnibus or NDAA were not guaranteed RINOs. They could’ve been misinformed or more single-issued.
I would prefer that we use the term: sell-outs rather than RINOs for those who refuse to acknowledge election fraud, as they can still be following republican principles, but have likely sold out some of them for some perceived benefit.
For example, Brian Kemp is a sellout and Mitt Romney is a RINO.
Call them all nincompoops for all it matters.
How can you call anyone that fails to defend the REPUBLIC a REPUBLICan? They are RiNOs.
That is a good point actually. I just believe we needed a better terminology to differentiate between those who are democrats that run on the Republican ticket and those who do nothing to defend Republican values. One actively fights and one does nothing.
Active vs Passive
One actively is a democrat. The other passively allows democrats to go unchallenged.
Gaining office while claiming party loyalty presumes active pursuit of said party's principles and aims. RINO simply means not doing that (as a Republican). The active/passive thing is a distinction without a difference.
who is doing that?