Conservatives have taken a huge blow this election. After eight years under President Obama, this election cycle was a real chance for Republicans to nominate someone who encapsulated notions of personal responsibility, individual liberty, laissez-faire economics, free speech, legal immigration and a strong national defense — rather than governmental overreach, socialist legislation and the conflagration of the constitution.

Instead, with hopes of defeating Hillary Clinton, they have a nominated Donald Trump: a pseudo-Conservative whose leftist instincts provide little distinction between him and his opponent. If Conservatives wish to survive beyond the imminent demise of Trump’s campaign, they must alter their political positions that pertain to climate change, the rights of the LGBTQ community, and divine exceptionalism.

The story of Donald Trump’s success is a tattered tale at this point but what is less talked about is why the other Republican candidates failed. Ted Cruz serves as the best example since he came closest to winning and justly fits the conservative mold. The problem with Cruz is that he may support unrestricted free speech, smaller government and lower taxes, but he also dismisses the reality of climate change, opposes gay marriage and pushes his Judeo-Christian values on a country that was founded on secularism; these latter perspectives will have a tough time surviving in an increasingly progressive political climate.

One of Conservatives’ biggest burdens is that they are continuing to wage wars that have long been lost. Same-sex marriage has been legal nationwide for over a year now, but gripes from the right over this ruling are still being heard. How is it that the same side that promotes as little government as possible, simultaneously wants to dictate who can marry whom? Perhaps it is because of their deep sense of devotion to Judeo-Christian values, a relationship that alienates anyone who practices a different religion or none at all. With regard to climate change, the two sides can disagree on legislation on how to handle it, but the right’s utter denial of the phenomenon overall is sheer madness.

With the way things currently stand, conservatives will only continue to attract mostly white males in a country that is becoming increasingly less white. This is a recipe for obsolescence. Pure conservatism may not appeal to many, but I believe a secular, inclusive, scientifically literate form of conservatism could.

One of the many troubling side effects of Trump’s campaign is that millions of young people who are witnessing their first election have begun to connect conservatism with Trump, which is an association that could not be further off the mark. I believe a far greater amount of people would adopt conservatism if they knew it was about pushing self-responsibility, bolstering capitalism, demolishing political correctness and prioritizing free speech, rather than the demagoguery, incompetency and vacuity of Trump.

If you view the constitution as something more than just a piece of paper, believe in meritocracy, resent over-reaching government and are sick of being lambasted for speaking freely, then conservatism may strike your fancy more than you thought. Of course, the foundation of conservatism is engulfed in tradition and exempting these particular principles may be counterintuitive to the ultra-conservative, but at this point, there is little else to do in assuring conservatism’s survival. If they were to drop the religious overtones, embrace scientific reality and recognize the rights of the LGBTQ community, all while sticking to the other traditional values of their doctrine — conservatives and all of those who love liberty could look forward to a much brighter future in U.S. politics.

Brian Deinstadt is a junior double-majoring in political science and English.