SomewhatDickish

I showed that bit to one of my female friends who is very senior in her field. It led to days of nonstop waffle and pancake jokes. So I guess, if nothing else, it was good for a laugh.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-ernst-young-how-to-dress-act-around-men_n_5da721eee4b002e33e78606a

I call bull on that "internal polling". There is a 0% chance that even 17% of people polled had any idea who "Howard Schultz" was.

While it seems unlikely that OP is going to respond, I think you ask a great question. In my view, as a former conservative and current moderate, there is no inherent contradiction between classical conservative ideology and any of the points you bring up. In fact, I'd argue that classical conservative ideology should be in favor of each of them.

1. Carbon emissions: stewardship of resources and the environment should be fully in line with a conservative outlook. I see this as falling under "personal responsibility", in the sense that actors (industry) should be responsible for the negative externalities they cause for others.
2. Universal health care: the fiscal conservatives should be all over the vast savings to be found here. Religious conservatives should see the good in "caring for the least of these". Etc.
3. Net neutrality: while the default conservative view is typically against government over-regulation of industry, as a heavily government financed system (in regards to infrastructure creation and tax breaks), the internet seems to fall into the "public utility" sphere to me. I do not see it as a legitimately conservative view to privatize the results of public investment.
4. Gay marriage: "individualism" and "keep the government's nose out of my business"
5. Criminal justice reform: a. Drug decriminalization: "individualism" and "keep the government's nose out of my business" b. Civil forfeiture: "due process" c. For profit prisons: "fiscal responsibility" (private for-profit penal institutions are more expensive overall)