"OK, here is my quandary. You are elected to represent a constituency. They unanimously have a point of view. You are representing them, they elected you to, do you vote for your own agenda or for what they want? The problem is, being in the closet and NOT letting the people who are voting for you who you really are. I sort of feel sorry for the guy. He now has both sides of the debate against him.
...Hehehe...Flowbee!..."
That's the age-old question in a republic such as ours. (As I'm sure you know, we don't have direct democracy in most jurisdictions.)
Is a representative elected to parrot the opinions of his constituents, OR is he elected to use the time and info available to him as a professional to make informed decisions even when they go against the overt "will of the people".
I would argue that almost all progress in this country has come directly from representatives who take the second path.