Although Labour support has eased by a couple of points since the round of local and devolved elections in May, the party’s support has proved surprisingly resilient in the face of not only a change of prime minister but also the fact that, since the referendum, the vast majority of Labour MPs have signalled a lack of confidence in their leader. While Corbyn’s critics are right to claim that the party has never shown signs of making much electoral progress under his leadership – during the course of the last year support for the party has hardly ever averaged more than 33% – equally, there has never been, and even now there still is not, much sign that the party is heading for Armageddon.

Perhaps one reason for this resilience is to be found in the data on satisfaction with leaders collected every month by Ipsos Mori. That there is widespread dissatisfaction with Corbyn among voters is clear: during the course of the past year, on average no fewer than 48% of respondents have said that they were dissatisfied with the Labour leader’s performance. That’s even higher than the equivalent figure (46%) during the first 12 months in charge of the man who still holds the record for being the most unpopular Labour leader ever – Michael Foot. However, at the same time, the 32% who have said they are satisfied with Corbyn is not only higher than the proportion who were satisfied with Foot (25%) during his first year as opposition leader, but is also higher than the proportion who were satisfied with David Cameron during this stage in his political career (30%).

‘The most unpopular Labour leader ever.’ Michael Foot in 1982. Photograph: Jane Bown

In short, Corbyn is more accurately described as a divisive opposition leader than as an unpopular one. More voters have had an opinion of him, either for good or ill, during his first year as opposition leader than have had a view about any of his predecessors during their initial 12 months in the post, Tony Blair included. But the fact that there has been a relatively large body of voters who are satisfied with his performance perhaps goes some way to explaining why Labour support has largely been holding steady, as well as why, at the same time, the party has been able to grow to more than half a million members and supporters via two leadership elections. There is evidently a section of the British public, to be found particularly among younger voters, for whom the Labour leader does have an appeal; it just does not look like a section that is big enough, on its own at least, to enable Labour to win a general election.

That will certainly be the case as long as the party’s leader cannot command the confidence of his parliamentary colleagues. The current division between the leader and the bulk of the parliamentary party on the one hand, and that between most MPs and much of the party’s membership on the other, has turned Labour into a dysfunctional gaggle. The linchpins of any political party – discipline and loyalty – are almost entirely absent.

Little wonder that relatively few voters think that Labour is best placed to handle any of the problems confronting the country – a perception that is bound to undermine any party’s attempt to win votes, irrespective of the ideological position it adopts.

• A longer version of this article appears in Juncture, the journal of thinktank the Institute for Public Policy Research.