Would Sen. Romney act as a principled Republican?

pro-choice when he ran for governor of Massachusetts because he didn’t understand what an embryo was? Or when his position on the wealth gap was, “There’s no question it’s not good being poor”?

Then he moved to Utah, and we forgot all about Mitt until he popped up in 2016 as a never-Trumper.

After Trump was nominated, Romney swore he’d never vote for him.

When Trump won, Romney reappeared in a third incarnation, as the Secretary-of-State-inWaiting who dined out with the president-elect, burbling about his “message of inclusion.” Then it became clear Trump was just dangling the nomination for the fun of seeing his old enemy leap up and down trying to grab it.

He did pop up occasionally, blasting Trump for his wishy-washy remarks about the neo-Nazis at Charlottesville and slamming Republicans who kept hedging their bets on the charges that their Alabama Senate candidate had sexually assaulted a 14-year-old.

Then, the Senate announcement. Maybe this time Mitt could have a point. Maybe he’d become a nationally known Republican voice who could call the president out when he did something stupid or mean, giving Trump something to worry about besides the dreaded Base. Maybe he’d be a primary challenger in 2020. Hope springs eternal.

First, he had to get the nomination in a state where he’s lived only a sliver of his life. Romney’s been trying to dig in, buying mansions in Utah (half his four houses are now there). This week he showed up for a Utah Jazz basketball game, eager to prove he was just one of the guys by wearing a Jazz jersey over his dress shirt.

Then — whoops! — Romney, who’s spent more than $500,000 so far on his campaign, lost the vote at last weekend’s Republican convention to a state representative who’d spent around $30,000.

Maybe they still regard Mitt as an outsider. (The winner, a physician named Mike Kennedy, declined in a phone interview to say exactly how he and Romney differed on policy: “I’ve not spent a lot of time studying his record as Massachusetts governor.”)

Virtually everybody expects Romney to win the primary in June. And the actual election shouldn’t be a problem in a deeply red state. But what then? Will we get a new principled Republican opposition or just another guy waiting for his chance to be interviewed on CNN about the glories of tax cuts?

One hint: When he announced his candidacy, Romney praised Utah, which he said “welcomes legal immigrants from around the world,” while the Trump administration “sends immigrants a message of exclusion.” But when it was time to woo those conservative convention delegates the pitch, um, changed. “I’m also more of a hawk on immigration than even the president,” Romney announced. “My view was these DACA kids shouldn’t all be allowed to stay in the country legally.”

He was speaking, of course, about the Obamaera program protecting people who were brought into the country illegally as children. On this issue our current president has held about every position known to mankind. Romney, meanwhile, is moving up on seven-eighths.

After his remarks, the campaign explained that Romney believes the DACA immigrants should be allowed to stay. The difference between him and Trump was that Romney doesn’t want to give them a special path to citizenship. While Trump did — that one day a couple of months ago.

We need that principled national voice, not just a guy who bounces around on issues like a well-coiffed rubber ball. Romney has to do better. Otherwise, we’ll go back to discussing the time he drove to Canada with the family dog strapped to the car roof.