Or an example closer to home: the Liberals seem to be repeating the 40 year reign of the Ontario PCs between the 1940s and 1980s.
Seems to me that what the Ontario electorate really wants the Liberal government, just without the scandals. The PCs might be able to eventually play that role, but that would mean disavowing their socially conservative elements and moving away from their fiscally conservative principles.
If they can't win in 2018 or 2022, I figure we might see a realignment of the parties, where the PCs move to the left, and their socially conservative members form their own party. This will be necessary because as the GTHA and (sub)urban Ontario population share continues to grow becoming less likely that Ontarians are ever going to accept a government with even a hint of strong social conservatism.
I think your response is on point.
However, I would add to it that I think the greatest harm to the Liberals has come from disingenuousness. That is to say, when policies or actions don't align w/supposed character or stated goals.
Obvious examples here would be the flip on Hydro One privatization; the initial 'strong' stand against scandal and bad optics followed by defending hefty political donations and pay for access minister meet-ups; and stressing progressivism, while initially offering little but lip service (till the last 12 months).
Hypocrisy will drive people nuts faster than almost anything.
***
The pickle for the Conservatives lies in the choice of leader. First off, whatever Brown says now, he once, publicly made very socially conservative statements.
He didn't do this merely while in Ottawa, but as recently as the race to become Conservative leader.
Only after winning did he suddenly champion a carbon tax, seemingly decide that he was pro-choice and sex education and otherwise happy to support a moderate political manifesto.
While the manifesto is imperfect, it really is, on balance a reasonable'ish plan that a political moderate/centrist should be able to consider backing.
But if you don't believe the man (or woman) pitching it, because they are on the public record as having opposite views for many years and in recent years........
That could be a tough sell.
***
Also I heard a bit of him when out in the car one day on the CBC Radio noon-time call-in.
He sounded both very aggressive and very talking point'ish.
He just wanted to endlessly link Wynne to the Sudbury trial and avoided answering questions from the host.
I get the political motivation, but it didn't come off well, at least to me.