I think that's the point where the cognitive dissonance sets in. "Winning is everything" doesn't fit comfortably into conservative philosophy.
Nope, that's a false dichotomy. The choice is *not* "stick to principles win, " versus "winning is everything, abandon principles". It's a failure to think in anything other than strict black-or-white terms that leads to this. The point (which I was trying to make earlier) is that advancing principles effectively requires being smarter than thinking your only choices are being unbending or abandoning the battle of ideas completely.
That is far too brittle a strategy and an ideology. It's a philosophy for losers.
Every President, including Reagan, has had to compromise. Under Reagan we got a Social Security tax increase. Was that conservative? He never got proper funding for the contras (thanks Jim Wright) and funded them illegally. Conservative? He undid parts of the 1981 tax cut just a year later in 1982. Conservative? Both Reagan and Bush have had to mix standing up for principles and compromising to get things done. It is dishonest to paint either with a broad 'winning is everything' brush.
If you dont find the messiness of necessary political compromising appealling, then focus your effort in special interest group activism instead. but any 1% political party is an utter waste of time, talent and energy.