If conservatives may appear at times to be more successful electorally, it's because political reaction works to protect the existing bases of power, and power definitionally succeeds except during a historical rupture.
And if conservatives do "win", it's not by gaining access to power through an ineffable phlogiston of common sense. It's because power defines common sense—whether that common sense is that all blacks should be slaves, all women remain in the kitchen, that abortion is equivalent to murder, homosexuality is deviance, migrants are terrorists—and creates with its definition a willing, "winning" constituency of the commonsensical.
The idea that in a fixed term representative democracy, voters control outcomes, and are stupid if they don't get what they want is a perfect example of this sort of common sense. In reality, the vote's a spectacle, the organs of state it legitimises are secondary enclosures and outhouses of real power, and the limits of what a fully free and self-determined vote could ever achieve are narrowly circumscribed.
Voters intuit this, which is one reason they don't give too many fucks about the franchise. But they're far from immune from the bargains of real power—like the grand bargain linking waged work, nationality, the spectacle of democracy, citizenship and the border that's foundational to European populist right politics.
Change comes along anyway, and the briefest inquiry into history shows the empires of today will eventually fall or fade away, no matter if tedious nihilists deem their subjects vicious and their struggles meaningless.
