He did not necessarily need to. He was coming off the back of a popular leader and his first job is to hold support rather than try to win it.
His first necessary step in that was to reassure that support base.
National's base have stuck like limpets for much of the past decade and provided Bridges plays it right they will continue to do so.
He started that job by promising no radical overhaul of economic policies from the formula he said had worked so well for National and for New Zealand.
He made reassuring noises directed at the base (and donors) to show he would not let power, youth and enthusiasm go to his head.
The bigger challenge is holding onto "soft" voters and stopping traditionally National voters in the regions from opting for NZ First.
By way of a start, Bridges identified the environment, regions and small business as areas of focus.
The environment is a nod to the "soft" National vote, such as urbanites. It is also a nudge that his rival Jacinda Ardern does not have the monopoly on it.
The regions pitch is a message to NZ First not to think National will cede that realm, despite NZ First minister Shane Jones' thundering dollops of money into those areas.
The biggest danger for National is if it appears Labour and the Greens will be able to form a government on their own.
That opens the way for NZ First to argue to National voters that it is needed to act as a handbrake on more left-wing agendas.
The regions have long been National heartland and it needs to ensure it remains that way.
Bridges has been just two days in the job so there remains a lot to learn about him.
At some point, Bridges will have to show a bit of soul.
In government he held bricks and mortar portfolios: Energy and Resources, Transport, and Economic Development. He built things.
Mines, roads, tunnels and infrastructure.
He turned many, many sods. But he never held a social portfolio.
That is where Bridges can learn the most from his predecessor, Bill English, and to a lesser extent, John Key.
In terms of temperament Bridges has compared himself to Key.
Both are natural "retail" politicians, socially comfortable and able to combine seriousness with humour. English had to work at that side of things.
But Bridges would do well to look to Bill English's valedictory speech when it comes to showing what drives him.
The departing MP's address was a perfect 45-minute slice of what encapsulated English: his roots in Southland, self-deprecating humour, his family, his principles, and what he believed a government was for.
He spoke about people struggling to cope, saying he had never met a person who had no hope, despite their circumstances.
He spoke of the role of Government being to ensure someone could act on that hope. He spoke of politics being a fickle thing: opportunities could come along without being earned and just as easily slip away. We saw him cry.
It was a lesson in how to show what is in a heart as well as a head.
Bridges may wish to rejig English's recipes for achieving social gains, especially those bedded in ideology. We are yet to hear him on matters such as child poverty.
Those opportunities lie ahead. Bridges has more immediate priorities, including knocking caucus into the shape he wants it.
The other challenge for Bridges is Ardern.
Both entered Parliament in 2008. They are four years apart in age – Ardern is 37 and Bridges 41.
They were telegenic and articulate and learned the ropes together on TVNZ's Young Guns slot.
Their backgrounds carry some similarities: both working class.
Ardern was raised in the provinces and settled in the city. Bridges was raised in the city and moved to the provinces.
Both were raised in religious families. Ardern was Mormon while Bridges' father is a Baptist minister.
But Ardern left the Mormon Church because of its stance on homosexuality.
Bridges is still a churchgoer and voted against the gay marriage bill.
There is a little bit of fight-fire-with-fire about the two - but not too much.
It is far more a battle of equals than Ardern and English was. That is partly because of the age similarity but also familiarity. Neither will be daunted by the other.
Bridges had something else to offer that his rivals did not: his three children, especially three-month-old baby Jemima.
If Ardern was hoping for a monopoly on baby photos, she may be disappointed.
For Bridges, there is also the question of coalition partners and NZ First.
Bridges' response to questions about NZ First has been to say the future relationship between the parties is up to NZ First, since it was they who turned away from National rather than vice versa.
The question may not need to be answered at all if NZ First's polling remains low.
Peters is hardly making it easier for his party. His constant attacks on Bill English and National are putting his own personal vendetta ahead of the interests of his party, which relies on votes from both sides to sustain it.
His pursuit of legal action and his churlish response to English's resignation will have exacerbated the disgruntlement National voters already feel about NZ First's decision to side with Labour.
But Bridges will not be "counting his chicken [sic]" as he put it in advance of the caucus vote that gave him the leadership.
When he delivered his maiden speech in 2008, Bridges had just beaten Peters in the Tauranga electorate and NZ First was out of Parliament.
Bridges paid a tribute to Peters: "You have been amongst the very longest-serving members in this House, and now you are no longer here. You will nevertheless be long remembered, and I wish you well in the future."
Three years later and Bridges' well-wishes bore fruit: NZ First is back.
Bridges probably learned from that not to discount Peters' Lazarus-like tendencies.
