The house will stand, but it'll be all one or all the other.
Preferably not the other.
I don't believe Conservatism is monolithic. My definition of Conservatism is not the same as the next person's. I also don't believe we should just sit idly by while our sworn enemies define who we are.
Reagan wouldn't have won a landslide in 1984 by calling fellow Republican's that they were spineless, mealy-mouthed RINO's, or fellow American's in flyover space that they were toothless hayseed Bible-thumping hicks. Reagan wouldn't have won in a landslide believing in the all or nothing mentality. Reagan wouldn't have won as a third party type either for that matter.
There has to be some certain bit of compromise. Reagan demonstrated that well. Destroying the Republican party or each other won't get us anywhere fast, seems too many are hellbent on doing more of that instead of advancing Reagan's idea of Conservatism.
How? Might I remind you that there isn't one brand of conservatism, or "My conservatism is better than your conservatism". I've never believed conservatism to be monolithic.
You believe what you want to believe, defend what you believe, persuade others to join your fight, and conservatism wins every time it's tried.
Anyone who adopts the "My conservatism is better than yours" mentality will always lose and remain pessimistic of the world around them.