If you think that's an accurate summary of the conservative position, then you too appear to have gotten your understanding of conservative positions from liberals describing them to you.
I'm not expecting to meet many conservatives on HN. I don't expect anyone here to agree very much with them. That would be silly, as I myself don't in many ways. But I believe in condemning things for what they are, not what we can caricature them to be.
An exhaustive or more representative listing including things that are less controversial or that conservatives and liberals agree on would be pretty irrelevant because they're not enough to outweigh the strong differences in opinion on the hot-button issues.
Simply leaving out the good bits doesn't make a portrayal a caricature unless it's exaggerating the bad bits. So it really does matter what your take is on the validity of the claims that were made, not just your opinion on what other claims should have been made.
I told you. "Not even wrong." It's a liberal's view on the conservative position; even if not literally "wrong", it's from a position of what is still deep incomprehension of what is being summarized.
If you are serious about digging into the differences, the best thing I can recommend is actually this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI1wQswRVaU
It will not be immediately obvious why I am recommending this; stick with it for a while, if you are serious about the question. (Also, every immediate conclusion you will leap to about the title is wrong; in particular, despite the title, I'm not calling any political orientation "irrational", or, at least, I am doing so equally. Nor is this a "conservative" speaking.) After the end, consider the differing perspectives between the two, and consider why I'd contend that either side describing the beliefs of the other is likely to end up "not even wrong". (It is fully symmetric; conservatives will also badly mischaracterize liberal beliefs, in general, even when the surface content is correct.)
Ultimately, the question of which way conservatives will vote on an issue does matter even if you'd prefer to talk about why they'll vote that way.
I'm sure that will irk both sides to some degree. But regardless of the stated motives, I've found it to be a pretty accurate (as someone who identifies as neither). Of course there are many examples of partisan interests, actors acting contrary to stated positions once in power and/or being in bed with entrenched political/business interests. All that jazz.
But on a given position I've found it's usually accurate that liberals will value equality for all, including the smallest minorities. Vice versa conservatives and liberty (where even the 1% is a minority).
I'm not taking a stand here beyond that, and hopefully we can avoid pointing out all the instances where party dynamics (see: PG's essay on Identity) cause this to breakdown in inconsistent ways. Abortion, drugs, etc.
I've met many smart, educated, eloquent conservatives who have expressed entirely reasonable views if you take the fundamental assumption of individual liberty as your founding principle, some of whom have changed my own mind. Likewise liberals, so long as you take equality as your ideal.
Hopefully this doesn't step on too many identity-toes.
The unfortunate reality of first-past-the-post elections means "god botherers" vs "gun grabbers" is a more apt description than any that touches on the more-nuanced feelings of anyone who votes for whatever they consider to be the lesser of the two evils. You have nuanced views - your USA party of choice does not.