Luke Tryl is the UK Director of More in Common
In the wreckage of the morning of July 5th the notion that the Conservatives might be back in power after a single term in opposition seemed fanciful. Reduced to under a quarter of the popular vote and with the lowest number of seats, it seemed more likely that the Conservative Party might go extinct than win power again.
But as the leadership candidates take to the stage today things look rather different.
To be sure the existential threat to the Conservatives remains as strong as it did in July – play it wrong and the Party could face the same terminal decline as the centre-right in France. But on the other side of the ledger, after a difficult few weeks for Keir Starmer the possibility of a Conservative comeback does not look impossible either.
The question for the leadership candidates is how best to position the Conservative Party to win back the public’s confidence.
Any strategy for rebuilding the Party has to start with the legacy of the last Government.
New More in Common polling suggests the contenders have a fine line to tread.
The public are more than twice as likely to say the Party should distance itself (55 per cent) than defend (22 per cent) its record in Government. Since the election, focus groups with voters who abandoned the Conservatives between 2019 and 2024 reacted most positively to Tom Tugendhat’s explicit apology in his campaign video, and Kemi Badenoch’s commitment to speaking the truth about the Tory record.
The leadership contenders then must find a way to acknowledge the last Government’s mistakes in office without conceding Labour’s attack that the Tories left the country in a mess which they are being forced to clear up.
Then comes the question – which way should the Party turn?
Try to ‘unite the right’ and win back Reform voters, but risk losing further votes to the Liberal Democrats and Labour in the centre?
Or pitch to the centre and risk conceding even more ground to Nigel Farage’s Party on the right flank?
Our research suggests that this is a false dichotomy and that phasing of the next leader’s strategy matters more than the direction they turn.
 The first step is to restore the Party’s record of competence.
When voters are asked what the Conservatives look like at their best it is ‘creating economic stability’ that comes out on top (nearly three times the number who cite ‘opposing woke ideology’).
That means despite the pull from different wings, the leadership contenders should avoid thinking the 2024 verdict was one of ideology – only three in ten think the Conservatives lost because of the wrong ideas, just 18 per cent think the Party should move to the right, the same number who think the party should turn to the left.
The failure borne out across polling was instead one of not delivering on what voters think the Conservatives are supposed to do best – run the country and the economy competently.
Convincing voters that the Conservatives are a safe pair of hands is a prerequisite for the first logical step of recovery – one almost entirely ignored in the analysis to date – re-engaging normally loyal Conservative voters who stayed at home in protest.
Around 2 million Conservative voters who backed the Conservatives in 2019 boycotted in 2024 – more than twice the number who switched directly to Labour. For 77 per cent of these Conservative abstainers, it was the first time that they had ever not voted.
To entice them back the next leader should highlight the Conservative record that this group approves of – school reform, welfare changes, supporting Ukraine while also promising to refocus on the core Conservative principle of sound economic management.
The second task is to win back switchers.
There is no path back to victory for the Conservatives without winning back some Reform voters. But they are also likely the most difficult to reach. Only one in ten Reform voters say they are likely to back the Tories at the next election – which is half the proportion of Labour and Liberal Democrat voters who say the same. This is where phasing matters, starting with the low hanging fruit.
The group most likely to say they regret their vote in July are Conservative to Labour switchers, a third of whom already say they wish they hadn’t voted Labour.
If the party can appeal to these voters through a focus on everyday priorities, rather than ideological purity tests, they can make the party competitive again. Similarly, the 57 per cent of Liberal Democrat voters who have voted Conservative in the past look similar to 2024 Conservative voters, and could be reachable if the party can show it has learned the lesson of its defeat, is presenting a united front and focuses on every day priorities like the cost of living, the NHS as well as tackling long term challenges such as immigration and climate change.
If the Conservatives can execute these first two phases – firstly winning back normally loyal Conservative voters and secondly winning back Labour and Liberal Democrat switchers, this in turn could enable the third phase of recovery – winning back Reform voters in a two horse race.
While some Reform voters are similar in profile to the radical right in Europe and will be difficult for any mainstream party to engage, many are simply voters disillusioned with the status quo. These voters felt able to register their protest against the Conservatives at the last election because it was so clear the Conservatives were going to lose.
But if the next election looked competitive things could be different.
Why? Because these Reform voters significantly prefer the prospect of a Conservative Government to a Labour one – in fact they are eight times more likely to say they preferred Sunak’s Government to Starmer’s Government.
When the choice is a straight one between Labour and the Conservatives, and the Party can show it has a plan for the country, many of these Conservative-Reform switchers could come home.
Follow this three phase approach, that puts competence and delivery at the heart of the Conservative brand, and whoever wins the leadership on November 2nd could well become Prime Minister.
If the Party instead chooses to prioritise one group of voters above another, or pursues a path of ideological purity, then the next leadership contest may not even be for Leader of the Opposition.
