Theresa May is not a particularly skilled politician. She’s evasive in interviews, awkward at prime minister’s questions and visibly uncomfortable when forced to interact with members of the public. She became leader of the Conservative party through blind luck, as her rivals stabbed each other in the back and self-immolated in quick succession.

Politely, you might describe her performance in her previous role of home secretary as “controversial”. Left-leaning and liberal critics thought her policy agenda was inhumane and needlessly harsh. Those on the right were contemptuous of her inability to actually meet any of her stated goals.

As prime minister she’s proving more popular, for now. Her personal approval rating has been gradually declining from its honeymoon period high, a trend that will likely only accelerate once voters get a better sense of what she’s actually about. Westminister political discourse has become so focused on Brexit that other big debates seem to have fallen by the wayside, but this can only hold for so long. Campaigners report that, in the Copeland and Stoke byelections, the EU referendum was already old news. Many local residents consider the issue decided and were more focused on jobs, housing, and healthcare.

A couple of months ago the British Red Cross warned that the NHS faced a humanitarian crisis following the deaths of two patients forced to languish on trolleys in hospital corridors because of a shortage of beds. The news agenda might have moved on, but the problem has not been solved. Conservative and Labour MPs wrote to May urging her to find a solution to health and social care funding and accusing her of failing to grasp the scale of the “immense challenge”.

There has also been an upsurge in strike action, which is perhaps unsurprising when you consider that the UK is the only large advanced economy where earnings fell when growth returned after the financial crash. We were told that spending cuts would be short-term pain for lasting gain, but most economists believe slashing the state actually damaged our economy. Workplace rights secured by previous generations of trade unionists are being eroded as employers turn to zero-hours contracts, outsourcing and faux self-employment to evade their responsibilities.

It’s hard to escape the feeling that the system has been rigged. The benefits of the economic recovery went mainly to the wealthy, while ordinary people’s living standards have stagnated or grown worse. Over time, public opinion has turned against austerity. Even a year ago only a minority of people believed it was necessary, and only a third believed it benefited the economy. There’s a growing sense that we’ve been taken for fools. Wealthy elites lined their own pockets with tax cuts for the rich while insisting they had no choice but to cut vital services.

May has benefited from not being closely associated with austerity – after Wednesday’s budget, that will change

May has benefited from not being closely associated with the austerity agenda – after Wednesday’s budget, that’s going to change. Her promise, last summer, to “make Britain a country that works not for a privileged few, but for every one of us” rings hollow now it has been revealed that she’s asked government departments to identify another 6% of potential spending cuts.

The crisis in health and social care is just one way that the effects of austerity are beginning to be felt more widely. May is expected to claim that she’s diverting funds towards caring for the “frail” but any token effort won’t come close to compensating for the 33,000 social care jobs slashed in the last five years. Many people who voted Conservative at the last election will have reason to regret that choice. And despite the hype, May does not possess the personal charisma to distract people from their own personal hardship. While focusing on Brexit is strategically beneficial for the government at present, this could soon change. Once negotiations start in earnest, it will become apparent that the UK can’t secure the kind of fantasy deal pro-leave campaigners promised. If our economy crashes, jobs leave the country and the price of food and other basic goods rises, voters may well turn against the party responsible for driving us over the cliff edge.

All of which makes claims that the next election is already in the bag for the Tories seem bizarre. I’ve noticed a creeping defeatism among Labour activists from all wings of the party, who see the current polling gap as near impossible to recover from. However, if we’ve learned anything in the past 12 months, it should be that things in politics can move fast. And the only way for the current Conservative government is down.

Labour has internal problems to solve, sure, but I’m not convinced the damage is as fundamental as it may feel. Presented to voters without the name of a party attached, Labour’s policies poll well. Plans to build a million new homes, introduce a £10 minimum wage and invest in transport links to “left behind” regions could transform the lives of millions of people. And these ideas aren’t pie in the sky: the International Monetary Fund is among the organisations arguing that the UK has underinvested in infrastructure in recent decades.

If you believe, as I do, that May’s policies will make the country worse while Labour has the ideas to make it better, it’s barmy to give up on convincing the general public in time for 2020, this is no time to throw up your arms and hand in your membership card. The party should be throwing everything it has at getting presentation and messaging right – looking competent, united and like a government in waiting. Effective leadership is part of the puzzle, but big improvements could be made whoever is at the helm. Style is the main reason it’s trailing behind the Conservatives. In terms of actual substance, Labour is already light years ahead.