Nigel Farage could have pulled off a masterstroke (Image: PA)
Is the Green Party about to supplant Reform UK? Unlikely. But it’s not only Labour who should be worried about the Greens running Reform a very close second (just two points) in the latest YouGov poll. True, this is likely a poll bounce from the Gorton and Denton by-election. Still, Reform needs to be careful that another party doesn’t suddenly become the go-to opposition against the Tory-Labour uniparty, albeit on the Left.
Yes, Reform can rightly point to postal and family voting issues, as well as bloc voting by British South Asians with the Greens pandering to ethno-religious sectarianism, as reasons for Hannah Spencer’s victory. But it’s also true that the Greens ran a positive campaign with a good story to tell. Nigel Farage is – like Zack Polanski – best when he and his party play the happy warrior talking of sunlit uplands.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Folks in hard-done-by post-industrial Britain don’t need reminding their lives are crap (take it from a Lutonian). Instead, they want to know how things can be made infinitely better.
While Reform still tops the polls, other data suggests Farage’s party is also the UK’s most disliked and extremely susceptible to tactical voting.
Bringing in ex-Tories may be a masterstroke in broadening Reform’s appeal, especially among voters still clinging to Kemi’s Conservatives.
As yet however, this has not translated to an upswing in the opinion polls (though nor has it led to a downswing either).
The Green surge is bad news for Sir Keir Starmer and may yet catalyse both his regicide at the hands of disgruntled backbenchers and perhaps even an early election, assuming Labour HQ thinks this can minimise the party’s electoral losses.
But Reform needs to be careful. Happy warriors win! Farage and his swagger testify to this. He didn’t win Brexit through negativity. In fact the Remain side lost because it had nothing positive to say about staying in.
Two points ahead of the Greens is not comfort zone territory for Reform. Polanski and his pals may have crazy ideas, but they can also claim the mantle of anti-establishment opposition to failed orthodoxy.
Reform remains out in front. But the positivity of Brand Farage is what will keep them there.
Nigel Farage was panned for this decision – but it could turn out to be masterstroke
Nigel Farage’s decision to resign his seat in Parliament and immediately seek re-election was one of the most controversial political gambles of his career.
When the Reform UK leader announced in July 2026 that he would step down as MP for Clacton and fight a by-election to win the seat back, critics described the move as a stunt and a distraction.
The timing was particularly significant.
Farage was facing intense scrutiny over financial support he had received from wealthy backers, including an undeclared £5 million gift from cryptocurrency businessman Christopher Harborne. His resignation triggered a fresh contest in Clacton and raised questions about whether the entire exercise was designed to change the political narrative surrounding him.
Yet what initially looked like an extraordinary political gamble produced a clear electoral result.
Farage won the Clacton by-election with 62 per cent of the vote and a majority of 36 per cent. The victory gave him a fresh parliamentary mandate, although it also automatically triggered the resumption of a parliamentary standards inquiry into the £5 million donation.
That combination makes the episode considerably more complicated than either Farage’s supporters or his critics initially suggested.
The decision that shocked Westminster
Farage had only been an MP for around two years when he announced that he was resigning.
He had finally entered the House of Commons at the 2024 general election after seven previous attempts to win a parliamentary seat. His victory in Clacton had been one of the defining moments of Reform UK’s breakthrough.
Giving up that position voluntarily therefore appeared, on the surface, to make little political sense.
Why abandon a safe parliamentary platform?
Why risk a by-election?
And why do it at a moment when Reform was already under scrutiny?
Farage’s explanation was that he wanted voters in Clacton to have the opportunity to judge him directly.
He presented the contest as a response to what he regarded as excessive scrutiny from Parliament and the media.
The move also allowed him to turn a story about parliamentary investigations into an election campaign in which he could appeal directly to voters.
His opponents interpreted the strategy differently.
The government described the by-election as a “farce” and a distraction, while other critics argued that Farage was attempting to escape political pressure rather than confront it. ITV reported that Chancellor Rachel Reeves accepted Farage’s resignation but described the resulting by-election in those terms.
A high-risk calculation
There was genuine risk in the decision.
Farage could not control who stood against him.
If the major political parties had coordinated their efforts or selected a strong candidate, the contest could have become considerably more difficult.
More importantly, losing the seat would have transformed the entire story.
Instead of returning to Parliament with a fresh mandate, Farage would have become a party leader without a Commons seat.
That would have created an obvious political problem for Reform.
The party was attempting to present itself as a credible national alternative, while its leader would have been forced to operate from outside Parliament.
That possibility explains why some Reform figures reportedly questioned the strategy.
The National reported that one senior Reform source described the decision as having initially seemed “clever” before appearing “stupid” after the major parties decided not to contest the by-election.
The political calculation had changed almost immediately.
The unexpected response from Farage’s opponents
Rather than producing a major confrontation, the by-election became an unusual contest.
The Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats all decided not to field candidates.
That left Farage facing a much less conventional challenge.
The decision deprived the by-election of the kind of heavyweight opposition that could have turned it into a genuine test of his personal popularity.
At the same time, it created an opportunity for Farage.
He could campaign without having to fight a conventional three- or four-way battle against the country’s major parties.
Instead, he could present the election as a direct confrontation between himself and what he described as the political establishment.
That was exactly the narrative he wanted.
The Guardian reported at the time that Farage’s opponents believed the resignation was intended to distract from questions surrounding his finances. The paper also noted that the decision represented one of the biggest political gambles of his career.
But a gamble only becomes a success if the outcome works.
The Clacton result
On 14 August, the result provided Farage with the number he needed.
He won 62 per cent of the vote.
ITV reported that his share was higher than at the 2024 general election and that he received around 1,000 more actual votes than he had achieved in July 2024.
The result was therefore not simply a technical return to Parliament.
It demonstrated that Farage could leave his seat voluntarily, ask voters to return him to Westminster and win with a substantial share of the vote.
For Reform UK, the result provided an immediate political talking point.
Farage could now argue that the people of Clacton had heard the arguments surrounding the controversy and had chosen to return him to Parliament.
His own description was even more confrontational.
After the result, Farage said the outcome “speaks for itself”.
But the story did not end there
The victory did not erase the underlying financial questions.
In fact, the by-election had an important legal and parliamentary consequence.
Because Farage had triggered the vacancy and then won the seat again, the parliamentary standards process concerning the £5 million donation automatically resumed.
That meant the election could not simply be treated as a mechanism for ending scrutiny.
The political argument and the parliamentary process were separate matters.
This distinction is crucial.
Winning an election demonstrates electoral support in that particular contest.
It does not establish that previous financial questions were resolved.
Nor does it determine the outcome of an investigation.
The Guardian had reported that Farage was facing a second parliamentary investigation over undeclared gifts when he announced his resignation.
Consequently, the by-election changed the political circumstances but did not automatically settle the controversy that preceded it.
Why supporters call it a masterstroke
For Farage’s supporters, however, the calculation was straightforward.
The decision achieved several things at once.
First, Farage returned to Parliament with a fresh mandate.
Second, he demonstrated that Reform could mobilise voters around its leader.
Third, he turned an uncomfortable political story into an election campaign.
And fourth, he reinforced his argument that the established parties and institutions were attempting to undermine Reform.
That interpretation is not universally accepted, but the electoral outcome gives supporters a concrete result on which to base it.
The 62 per cent vote share is an objective fact.
The interpretation of what it means politically is more contested.
ITV’s analysis was more cautious, noting that although Farage won decisively, the decision to resign had always been a gamble and the by-election was unusual because the major parties did not contest it.
That makes the result significant without necessarily making it proof that every part of Farage’s strategy was correct.
The danger of turning politics into a personal contest
There is another dimension to the episode.
Reform UK is attempting to develop from a political movement associated heavily with Farage into a broader national party with councillors, MPs, policy spokespeople and an organisational structure capable of competing across the country.
A by-election centred almost entirely on Farage reinforces his personal political brand.
That can be an advantage.
But it can also create a strategic question.
Can Reform continue to expand when its leader is the central focus of almost every major political story?
Recent reporting has highlighted precisely this tension.
The Guardian noted that Reform’s highly centralised leadership structure and Farage’s polarising public image could present difficulties for the party as it attempts to broaden its appeal.
The Clacton result therefore demonstrates Farage’s personal electoral strength, but it does not by itself answer the larger question of how Reform performs without him at the centre of every contest.
A victory with a complicated legacy
The decision to trigger the by-election can therefore be viewed from two very different perspectives.
Critics saw it as an unnecessary political stunt that consumed time and resources while failing to resolve the questions surrounding Farage’s financial affairs.
Supporters saw it as an opportunity to bypass Westminster criticism and ask voters directly whether they continued to support their elected representative.
The result gave supporters a powerful piece of evidence.
Farage won.
He returned to Parliament.
And he did so with a larger share of the vote than in the previous general election.
But the result did not eliminate the standards investigation, nor did it settle the wider debate about Reform’s finances.
In that sense, the election was both a political victory and the beginning of another stage of scrutiny.
The bigger Reform question
Perhaps the most interesting consequence is what happens next.
Farage now has his Commons seat back.
But Reform faces a political environment that is very different from the one that existed when he first entered Parliament.
Labour has changed leadership.
The Greens have strengthened their position in some areas.
The Conservatives are attempting to rebuild.
A rival political movement led by Rupert Lowe has also emerged.
And Reform itself has faced internal controversies and questions about its organisation and finances.
Farage therefore cannot rely indefinitely on the Clacton result.
The by-election demonstrated that he retains substantial support among voters in that constituency.
The broader national question is whether that support can translate into sustained support for Reform across hundreds of constituencies.
That is a much larger challenge.
Was it really a masterstroke?
Calling the decision a “masterstroke” ultimately depends on what outcome is being measured.
If the objective was to return Farage to Parliament, the strategy succeeded.
If the objective was to demonstrate that he could still win substantial personal support in Clacton, the result provided clear evidence.
If the objective was to make the parliamentary scrutiny disappear, however, the result did not achieve that: the standards inquiry resumed automatically after his re-election.
That distinction matters.
Political decisions rarely have only one consequence.
Farage’s gamble produced a decisive electoral victory while simultaneously creating another round of parliamentary scrutiny.
The episode is therefore less a simple story of triumph or failure than an example of how political risk can produce several outcomes at once.
What seemed reckless to some observers produced a substantial electoral result.
What supporters regarded as a direct appeal to voters did not remove the institutional questions surrounding the original controversy.
And what began as an extraordinary resignation ended with Farage once again sitting in the House of Commons.
The most revealing part of the story may therefore be that Farage was willing to take such a risk in the first place.
For a politician whose career has repeatedly been built around challenging established political conventions, the Clacton by-election was entirely consistent with his wider approach.
Whether it ultimately strengthens Reform UK beyond one constituency will require evidence from future elections.
But the immediate result is clear: the gamble did not end with Farage outside Parliament.
It ended with him back inside it, holding a fresh electoral mandate and preparing for the next political battle.