For many, being a Republican seems to mean "someone who agrees with me on every issue and acts according to my priorities." This definition is convenient because it allows those using it to brand people they disagree with as "RINOs." However, this is far from the true definition. According to the Minnesota Republican Party's state constitution, the goal of the party is clear:

The object of the party shall be the maintenance of government by and for the people according to the Constitution and the laws of the United States and the State of Minnesota, and the implementation of such principles as may from time to time be adopted by party conventions. To obtain this object it is essential the party shall organize at all levels to elect Republicans to public office.

This means that being a Republican is about one thing: organizing to elect Republicans to public office. So, for someone to be a "Republican in name only," they would have to claim to be a Republican but work against the party's goal of electing Republicans.

This definition shifts the narrative. There are indeed people within the party who undermine Republican candidates, even though they call themselves Republicans. These "real RINOs" exist on both sides of the ideological spectrum. On one side, there are those who present themselves as "true conservatives" but try to force the party to adhere to their rigid views. On the other, there are elitists who once had prominence but now openly endorse Democrats, like "Republicans for Harris." While both groups could be considered RINOs, they aren’t always the ones being labeled as such.

Both groups share a flawed belief: that their personal principles are more important than the practical outcomes of elections. They think withholding support or redirecting it elsewhere will make the party shift toward them. This is not only wrong but also harmful.

Take an example from the left: pro-Hamas activists in this election cycle have tried to pressure the Democratic Party by organizing the “Uncommitted” movement to push anti-Israel agendas. It hasn’t worked. Instead of shifting in that direction, Kamala Harris has publicly emphasized her support for Israel, even attempting to appeal to swing voters by softening her left-wing stance. While it may be frustrating for those who know her true positions, it’s a smart political move—she’s taking the path of least resistance to win votes. This strategy shows how trying to negotiate with extreme demands rarely works. Instead, political actors seek out the support of those who are easier to convince.

Conservatives who feel the Republican Party has drifted away from its ideals can learn from this. Taking electoral hostages won't bring the party back to their side. Instead, it will push the party further toward the political center. To regain influence, conservatives need to organize effectively at all levels to elect Republicans, which would provide value to both candidates and the party infrastructure.

The Republican Party is at a crucial moment, and it's ready to be shaped by whichever ideological faction steps up first. Real RINOs on the left are eager to claim control, but they face the same problem as many grassroots conservatives—they are undermining the mission by openly supporting Democrats. This won’t give them influence within the party; it will only alienate them.

The real question is which group will adapt first. Will grassroots conservatives recognize that their strength lies in helping elect Republicans? Or will the elitist defectors seize the opportunity? Whoever acts first and most decisively will move from being labeled as a "RINO" to being recognized as a true Republican—whether for better or worse.