On April 21, Brandeis Conservatives tabled in Usdan to facilitate discussion on federal government spending and increase political critical thinking. Students were asked to describe their views on the spending and transparency of the University, the Board of Trustees and the Student Union. Results for the Student Union survey varied between not knowing enough about the Student Union to discuss the topic to “support for the current spending level” and “support for reducing it,” as well as a significant margin of “support for greater transparency.”

Regarding the Board of Trustees and the University itself, however, respondents overwhelmingly voiced support for reduced spending, practical financial practices and increased transparency. These students, hesitant to take the survey at first due to the stigma attached to conservatives at Brandeis, were surprised when told that their views were in line with the conservative view on federal government, which espouses reduced spending and increased accountability.

The students then engaged in conversation over the meaning of conservatism and its relation to them which left many with a markedly different impression of the political right than they had held beforehand and more willing to learn about opinions on the other side of the aisle.

The results of Brandeis Conservatives’ tabling serves as an example for the removal of preconceived political notions on a larger scale as well.

With the 2016 presidential elections coming closer, most college students have already begun using the hashtag #readyforhillary on social media or forming groups in support of Senator Bernie Sanders. At the same time, they are already openly stating their opposition to voting for any Republican candidate, before the presidential race even begins in full force and the positions of all the candidates come to light. 

However, voters and college students in particular should rid themselves of their preconceived notions of what it means to be conservative. College students have a tendency to label Republicans and conservatives as misogynistic, homophobic or participants in other forms of bigotry, according to a 2013 study by the College Republican National Committee.

Such is not the case. Being conservative and being socially liberal are not mutually exclusive,  although conservative candidates don’t tend to be socially liberal. Desiring a limited federal government does not mean one is against gay marriage, and wanting the federal government to reduce its spending does not go hand-in-hand with the marginalization of women or ethnic minorities. Conversely, that most Democrats are socially liberal does not guarantee the correctness of their views on economic or foreign policy or other issues.

If college students look past the wave of anti-Republican noise that is shoveled at them—the Buzzfeed and Upworthy articles, the viral videos of statements made by the most radical right members of the GOP, the poorly argued Huffington Post pieces or Daily Show skits that skewer conservative officials with ad hominem attacks rather than reasoned debate—they might notice that they might, in fact, share some positions with those on the right. Just this past Friday, Buzzfeed published an article chastising Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio for missing an intelligence briefing while in New Hampshire, stating that this hurt his message of foreign policy experience setting him apart from the current president and Democratic hopefuls. However, Rubio has historically prioritized foreign affairs and serves on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. The article did not provide a credible argument against any of Rubio’s views or delineate facts that show that Rubio indeed lacks foreign policy experience, but rather attacked his person on a pitifully weak basis. 

These kinds of feeble rebuttals and the generalization of Republican candidates are common among college students, as well. For example, have students actually conducted a thorough inspection of Marco Rubio’s views before ruling him out? Do they know that he was one of the staunchest supporters of immigration reform—an issue usually considered dear to Democrats’ hearts? Moreover, instead of mocking his criticism of President Obama’s outreach to Cuba, have students considered that Rubio’s family suffered heavy persecution under Castro’s brutal dictatorship and that he is more qualified to speak on the subject than most?

Generalizations of the right as dense contrarians devoid of intelligent and pragmatic ideas are further far-fetched. Conservatives espouse economic views proven to be sound when integrated correctly. Significantly raising the minimum wage does pose a distinct threat of an increase in unemployment rates; this view is based on facts and precedent, not mindless conjecture. The federal debt is currently at $18 trillion; federal spending needs to be reduced to offset its continuous increase. Republicans do not want to cut spending out of a desire to stagnate the political process, but rather due to legitimate concerns over the United States’ financial future and the worrisome size of its government.

Additionally, to disagree with such aspects of President Obama’s foreign policy as the Iran deal, lack of response to Syria and Iran’s violations of his red lines, weak response to Russia’s takeover of Crimea, the advancement of the Islamic State and insufficiency of support for Israel and the United States’ Gulf allies does not make one a brainless “neocon.” Many voters simply view the president’s lack of action when presented with various red lines, insufficiency of support for crucial allies, and failure to scale back aggressors as constituting a failure on the foreign policy front.

These views need not be relegated to the right. Being pro-gay marriage or pro-abortion rights does not prevent one from thinking conservatively on other crucial matters of the day.

Thankfully, many students have already started understanding this distinction. A Harvard University poll conducted in November found that 51 percent of voting millennials in 2014 planned to vote Republican and that an all-time low of 43 percent of millennials approved of President Obama. The Republican victories in last year’s midterm elections further showed a rise in support for the right, as more people came to the realization that their situation under the Democratic-controlled government was not being dramatically improved.

That is not to say that Republican values apply to everyone. Many students will still disagree with the Right on the aforementioned issues or refuse to vote for Republican candidates due to a sizable divide over social issues. Republican candidates might make statements that do deserve to be condemned or scrutinized. However, before rejecting them outright, students and voters in general should make an effort to discern if the views of the candidates are truly incompatible with their own, or if they do not want to vote for them because of the elephant in their logo.

Many students were incredulous during the tabling when they registered that they shared a position with conservatives. They might be intrigued to learn that they agree with conservatives and Republicans on other issues, as well.

Thus, when considering potential candidates to vote for in the next elections, it is crucial to remember to vote based on the issues, not the party. Vote for someone whose stances are agreeable and appealing, not because they are associated with one party or another.