Nigel Farage and Reform UK have suffered a huge blow after a former MP rumoured to be considering moving to the party announced he’ll stand for the Conservative Party instead.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, a GB News presenter and veteran Brexiteer, told the channel he had applied to be a candidate under Kemi Badenoch in the next election.

He has previously served in Parliament as Member for North East Somerset from 2010 to 2024 before losing his seat to Labour’s Dan Norris.

The 57-year-old former MP has long been rumoured to be considering moving to Reform UK – something he has always denied.

Yet his confirmation that he has put his hat in the ring to be a Tory candidate once again will be seen as a blow to Reform UK.

Mr Rees-Mogg was an influential player in the Brexit campaign and served as Chairman of the eurosceptic European Research Group (ERG) from 2018 to 2019.

A member of the Cornerstone Group, a traditionalist pressure group within the party when he was serving as an MP, he was one of the Tories most rebellious members.

Once, he even proposed a deal be struck between the Tories and the UK Independence Party (UKIP), to block remainer MPs.

Since losing his seat in the West Country he has worked as a presenter on the TV channel GB News where he hosts his own show.

Mr Rees-Mogg told presenters “Well I sent in my application to go back on the list this week, so we will see where I get perched later.”

His announcement followed news that former Tory Minister Grant Shapps had been told he was not allowed to stand again.

In what fast became known as a “purge” of the wets, Shapps declined to provide a comment.

However a source within the party told The Spectator that “No doubt some who have failed the process will pop up in Reform to great fanfare when Nigel gets desperate for attention once he’s finished arguing with a bin.”

A friend of the former MP said “It’s surprising to see someone who was party chairman who actually won a general election being prevented from standing by the party.”

Huge Blow for Farage as Top Brexiteer Says He Is Not Joining Reform — A Political Analysis

The headline “Huge blow for Farage as top Brexiteer says he is not joining Reform” reflects the competitive nature of modern British politics, where the support or rejection of high-profile political figures can influence public perception of a party’s momentum. Whether such a decision represents a genuine setback depends on its wider political context, the popularity of the individuals involved, and the broader electoral landscape.

Political parties often seek endorsements from well-known figures who share similar values or have established reputations among voters. When a prominent supporter of Brexit publicly declines to join Reform UK, commentators may interpret the decision in different ways. Some view it as evidence that the party faces challenges in expanding its appeal, while others see it as an individual decision with limited long-term significance.

For Nigel Farage, political leadership has long been associated with campaigns focused on Brexit, immigration, national sovereignty, and political reform. His supporters argue that he has reshaped political debate by bringing issues such as border control and constitutional change into the mainstream. They believe Reform UK continues to attract voters dissatisfied with the traditional political parties.

Critics, however, argue that any political movement hoping to grow beyond its core support must attract experienced politicians, respected public figures, and a broader range of policy expertise. If influential individuals decide not to join, opponents may claim that the party’s expansion has reached a limit or that concerns remain about its long-term strategy.

The decision of a prominent Brexiteer to remain outside Reform UK can also reflect the diversity of opinion within the Brexit movement itself. Although many people supported the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union, they have not always agreed on how the country should be governed afterward. Some favour working through established parties, while others support newer political movements. As a result, support for Brexit does not automatically translate into support for any single political party.

Supporters of Reform UK may argue that political success depends on policies rather than individual personalities. They could point to public concerns about immigration, taxation, economic growth, or public services as reasons why voters may continue supporting the party regardless of who chooses to join it. From this perspective, one high-profile refusal does not necessarily change the party’s broader political direction.

On the other hand, political symbolism can matter. High-profile endorsements often generate media attention and create an impression of growing momentum. Likewise, public refusals can be used by political opponents to question a party’s ability to unite like-minded supporters. In highly competitive elections, these perceptions may influence undecided voters as much as policy debates themselves.

The media also plays a significant role in shaping the interpretation of such events. Headlines frequently describe developments as a “huge blow” or a “major victory” to attract attention, even when the long-term political impact remains uncertain. The actual significance usually becomes clearer over time through opinion polls, election results, and public reactions rather than through immediate headlines alone.

Ultimately, political parties are judged by a combination of leadership, policies, organisation, and electoral performance. Individual endorsements can strengthen a campaign, but they rarely determine its success on their own. Voters typically consider a wide range of issues, including economic management, public services, national security, and trust in political leaders, before making electoral decisions.

In conclusion, the claim that a leading Brexiteer’s refusal to join Reform UK is a “huge blow” for Nigel Farage represents a political interpretation rather than an established conclusion. While such decisions may influence media narratives and public discussion, the long-term significance depends on how political parties respond, whether they continue to attract public support, and how effectively they address the concerns of voters. In a democratic system, lasting success is ultimately determined not by headlines but by sustained public confidence and electoral results.