Linked in the post is a website available at stopreformuk.vote, which appears to be a tactical voting tool for voters to understand how to vote “against” Reform most effectively on their ballot.

Tactical voting involves casting a ballot for a party one would otherwise not support, but which stands the best chance of stopping another party from winning.

The StopReformUK site invites users to enter their postcode in order to find out “how to keep the Tories and Reform out in your area”.

Instead of Reform candidates, former Conservative minister Andrea Jenkyns in Greater Lincolnshire and retired boxer Luke Campbell in Hull and East Yorkshire, the website instructs voters to support the Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates, respectively.

Users can browse by party to find out in which areas to vote Labour.

One user said it was “panic stations, Star Troopers”, referring to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, while another said “you lefties will do anything to win”.

Richard Cleaver, an independent councillor on Lincolnshire County Council, replied to the post: “Not a great tool, I’m sorry to say.”

Also being held on Thursday is the Runcorn and Helsby by-election, called after Mike Amesbury’s resignation following his conviction earlier this year for assaulting a constituent.

Sir Keir Starmer faces his first by-election since the general election in what had been a safe Labour seat, but is now hotly contested with Reform.

Labour’s New Tactic to Stop Nigel Farage’s Reform Storm at Local Elections

Labour is preparing for another fierce battle with Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, with the party increasingly focused on a strategy designed to prevent the Reform surge from turning into further gains at local elections.

The approach centres on a simple message: voters who want to stop Reform should consider which candidate has the strongest chance of defeating it, rather than dividing their support between Labour, the Greens and other parties.

That strategy has already become a significant feature of contests involving Reform. Tactical voting has been discussed openly by campaigners, while Labour has repeatedly attempted to portray individual local contests as a choice between the governing party and Farage’s movement.

The stakes are particularly high after Reform’s strong performance in the 2026 local elections, when the party made major gains across areas that had previously been dominated by both Labour and the Conservatives.

The “Stop Reform” strategy

Labour’s central argument is increasingly straightforward.

Rather than simply asking voters to support Labour because it is Labour, campaigners can frame elections around preventing Reform from gaining control.

That changes the nature of the political contest.

Instead of a conventional Labour-versus-Conservative battle, voters may be presented with a three- or four-way contest in which the anti-Reform vote could be split between several parties.

For Labour strategists, preventing that split is crucial.

The party has already used advertising and targeted campaigning to highlight controversial statements and policy positions associated with Reform politicians. The intention is to make the election a referendum on whether voters want Reform representatives running councils or representing their communities.

Supporters of the strategy argue that this gives Labour a way of bringing together voters who may disagree with one another on many issues but share concerns about Reform.

Critics, however, argue that relying too heavily on an anti-Reform message could allow Labour to avoid confronting the reasons some former supporters have moved away from the party.

Tactical voting becomes a bigger issue

Tactical voting is not a new feature of British elections, but Reform’s rise has given it renewed importance.

In constituencies where Labour, the Conservatives, Greens and Reform are all competing, the distribution of votes can matter as much as the overall popularity of a party.

A voter who strongly dislikes Reform may therefore face a difficult decision if Labour is not the strongest challenger in their area.

Recent polling and campaign analysis have suggested that some voters are willing to vote tactically specifically to prevent Farage’s party from gaining power.

That creates an unusual coalition.

A Labour supporter could potentially find themselves relying on a Conservative voter to support Labour in one constituency, while a Green supporter could face pressure to do the same.

Such alliances are politically awkward because Labour remains in competition with those same parties elsewhere.

But Reform’s rise has created a shared incentive among some opponents to focus on the immediate electoral arithmetic.

Reform has already shown why Labour is worried

The strategy cannot be separated from Reform’s performance in the 2026 local elections.

The party made significant gains in former Labour strongholds as well as traditionally Conservative areas. It also expanded its presence in local government, giving it a much stronger organisational base than it had previously possessed.

That makes the next round of local contests particularly important.

Reform is no longer simply attempting to attract protest votes. It is building a network of councillors and local activists capable of campaigning between elections.

Every council seat can provide additional visibility and organisational experience.

That is why Labour cannot simply wait for national politics to change.

If Reform continues to build its local presence, the party could become increasingly difficult to dislodge from communities where it has established itself.

The attack-ad strategy

Another element of Labour’s response has been a more aggressive effort to highlight controversial comments made by Reform politicians and candidates.

The party has previously used online advertisements and election broadcasts to draw attention to remarks it argues demonstrate the character of Reform.

The purpose is not simply to criticise individual candidates.

Labour wants voters to associate Reform’s national leadership with the behaviour and statements of its wider network.

That is an important distinction because Reform’s rapid growth has brought dozens of new councillors, candidates and activists into the political spotlight.

Whenever one makes a controversial statement, opponents can use it to question the party’s wider judgement.

Reform, meanwhile, has argued that Labour is attempting to distract voters from issues such as immigration, the cost of living, public services and dissatisfaction with Westminster.

The battle is therefore as much about defining the other side as it is about promoting one’s own policies.

Farage faces a different kind of challenge

For Nigel Farage, tactical voting presents a strategic problem.

Reform’s support can be substantial without necessarily translating into control of every council or victory in every constituency.

British elections often reward concentrated support rather than simply national popularity.

If voters who oppose Reform coordinate around a single challenger, Reform can potentially lose contests even when it has a large following.

That is why the party has increasingly emphasised the importance of winning directly rather than depending on fragmented opposition.

Farage’s response has generally been to argue that voters should reject what he describes as the old political establishment.

His pitch is that Reform should not be treated as a protest party that other parties can defeat through tactical manoeuvring.

Instead, he wants voters to view Reform as a genuine alternative government.

Labour has its own vulnerability

There is a danger for Labour in making the election entirely about stopping Farage.

The more Labour tells voters that they must vote Labour to prevent Reform, the more voters may ask what Labour itself is offering.

That question is particularly important in former Labour heartlands.

Many voters who switched away from Labour did not necessarily become committed Reform supporters overnight. Some were responding to immigration, economic pressures, public services, cultural issues or a sense that the party no longer represented their priorities.

If Labour’s answer is simply that Reform must be stopped, those voters may not necessarily return.

They may instead remain undecided or continue supporting another party.

This is why some within Labour have argued that an anti-Reform message needs to be combined with a positive programme focused on everyday concerns.

Reform wants to turn the tables

Farage’s political strategy depends partly on preventing Reform from being defined solely by its opponents.

If Labour campaigns heavily against Reform’s candidates, the party can claim that the establishment is frightened by its rise.

That is a familiar political dynamic.

An attack can sometimes reinforce the target’s outsider image.

Reform can tell voters that Labour is spending its time attacking Farage because it cannot answer the concerns driving people towards Reform.

Whether that argument succeeds depends heavily on the local circumstances.

A controversy involving a Reform candidate may have a major impact in one constituency while having little effect elsewhere.

Likewise, a strong Labour candidate can potentially persuade voters who are dissatisfied nationally to remain with the governing party locally.

The battle for working-class voters

The deeper contest is over Britain’s changing electoral map.

Labour remains determined to rebuild its connection with working-class communities, while Reform is attempting to make itself the political home for voters who feel ignored by traditional parties.

Immigration is central to that competition, but so are wages, housing, energy costs, taxation, crime and the quality of local services.

The party that can convince voters that it understands those problems will have an important advantage in the political conversation.

For Labour, that means demonstrating that it can deliver visible improvements.

For Reform, it means proving that its growing number of councillors can translate promises into practical results.

Local government will therefore become a testing ground for both parties.

A high-risk strategy for Labour

The emerging Labour strategy is clear: expose Reform’s record, highlight controversial remarks, encourage tactical voting and persuade voters that Labour is the most effective vehicle for preventing Reform gains.

But it is not without risks.

If Labour focuses too heavily on attacking Farage, Reform can portray itself as the outsider under siege.

If Labour concentrates only on tactical voting, it could struggle to persuade voters who want a positive reason to support the party.

And if the anti-Reform vote remains divided, Reform could continue winning seats even without securing majority support across an entire area.

The coming local elections will therefore be about much more than council administration.

They will provide another test of whether Reform’s national momentum can be converted into lasting local strength — and whether Labour can rebuild enough support to prevent that transformation.

For Farage, the challenge is turning a growing movement into an electoral machine capable of winning despite tactical opposition.

For Labour, the challenge is convincing voters that stopping Reform and choosing Labour are effectively the same decision.

The outcome of that political battle will depend not only on national headlines, but on thousands of local conversations, candidate reputations and the choices made by voters who may be increasingly willing to abandon their traditional party loyalties.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.