Nigel Farage to become new leader of Reform party for UK election and will be standing as an MP in Clacton - Reform is the successor to UKIP and the largest party in the polls after Labour and Conservatives

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Live stream announcement

Telegraph article

BBC news stub

Richard Tice has announced that Nigel Farage has become the new leader of Reform UK.
He told a press conference in London: “How do we turn on the rocket boosters, the turbo chargers, to this campaign?”
He added: “As people know, I wanted Nigel to be able to give as much energy and effort, commitment to this campaign, as he felt able to do.”
He then said: “I thought well actually, what I really want to do is to invite Nigel Farage to become leader of Reform UK.”

Nigel Farage speaks as leader of Reform UK​

Nigel Farage has told the conference: “Now we put our operations’ notice today other title emergency election announcement. We did that because we think this election needs a bit of gingering up. Thus far, it was the dullest, boring electoral campaign we have ever seen.”
The new leader of Reform UK said: “We know that taxes will stay high. We know that mass immigration will continue regardless of which party wins power.
“We know that people will get poorer. We also know that crime or fear of crime will get worse.”
He added: “We’re doing better than our former partners in the European Union, but we’re massively behind America and many other parts of the world. We’re in social decline and we’re actually in a form of moral decline. We’ve forgotten who we are as a country.

Nigel Farage has announced he will stand as an MP for Reform UK.
He told a conference in London: “Now I stood here, a week ago, and I said look, hands up. I’ve been nonplussed by Rishi calling a short term election, it doesn’t give me the time to find a constituency doesn’t give me the time to build up data.”
“I thought the rational thing to do was not to stand but to do my bit as supporting the country, around the party, and for the last week, that is what I’ve been doing. I’ve been traveling all around the country. I’ve had the honour of appearing with Piers Morgan on Question Time amongst other things.”
He then announced: “I’ve decided I’ve changed my mind. It’s allowed you know. It’s not always a sign of weakness, it could potentially be a sign of strength.”
 
Last edited:
Farage traded metals as a commodities broker and Dulwich College is not a public school
You're right about the commodities brokerage but Dulwich College is a public school by the english definition, you might be using the american one. In the UK, a public school is a private school above a certain status with corresponding fees student body etc, like Eton and Harrow.

Dulwich.png
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: ApeBass
Playing kingmaker might be the tactically sensible move to make

I'm English, and I have friends who went to Dulwich. It's just a regular private school
What definition are you using for private, because public is about how historic the school is, it's a reputation/class thing. Regular people can still go there if they can afford it.
 
I went to one of the oldest schools in London. It's not a public school. Public Schools are the ones covered under the Public Schools Act of 1868
Ok, fair enough, legally it isn't. I think most people would recognise it has a historic / upper class reputation though.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Coccxys
I think he is standing for that constituency just so nobody else can
He's standing there because it's the constituency he has the highest chance to win in, and he's the most likely guy to win it.
Clacton is the most deprived area of the UK where people live in sheds
To think that people in a deprived area won't vote for a well-off person is the same mistake people made thinking that the US' rust best wouldn't vote for Trump. In the last election Clacton voted for a privately-educated Conservative theatre actor with 72%, because he was standing on the "Get Brexit Done" platform. They're people (almost wholly white) who have been pushed out of prosperity and left to die by our NGOcratic globalist system. They've voted based on policy and platform, not personality. Personally I can't see Farage losing this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shinkai
He's standing there because it's the constituency he has the highest chance to win in, and he's the most likely guy to win it.

To think that people in a deprived area won't vote for a well-off person is the same mistake people made thinking that the US' rust best wouldn't vote for Trump. In the last election Clacton voted for a privately-educated Conservative theatre actor with 72%, because he was standing on the "Get Brexit Done" platform. They're people (almost wholly white) who have been pushed out of prosperity and left to die by our NGOcratic globalist system. They've voted based on policy and platform, not personality. Personally I can't see Farage losing this time.
It's not that I don't think they will, it's that I think he's full of crap.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Coccxys and Shinkai
Good anything to split the vote, as much as people might kvetch about Farage being controlled opposition he's one of the few political figures that the average man on the street doesn't actively hate.

These Tory clowns in office deserve zero seats in parliament. When we inevitably get Labour, it's better that they wear their disgusting politics on their sleeves rather than attempt to veil it behind "conservative values" when they haven't conserved a fucking thing. These "people" had Stonewall (communist fifth columnists) as sanctioned DEI advisers to government departments.
 
Last edited:
It's not that I don't think they will, it's that I think he's full of crap.
I certainly agree to the extent that he's a total opportunist, but I'm not going to consider him an overall liability until there's at least one major UK political figure saying "diversity isn't working" in competition with him. Right now he's all there is.
 
Reform needed to do way more than this to have a remote chance. Nigel will give them some press but you know the UK media outlets are getting ready to dig to see how how many of Reforms candidates use gamer words or said something else unfortunate on social media.

Not that it really matters. Slowing immigration was something that needed to happen back in 2015 - and well before the lock down boat-a-pooloza

Farrage had plenty of chances to capitalize on the desire for a non Lib/Con option and he always balked at chance. Unless they've got a stunning manifesto - this will just give someone who can't stomach putting a vote in for Labour a (hopeless) option.
 
Not that it really matters. Slowing immigration was something that needed to happen back in 2015 - and well before the lock down boat-a-pooloza
Past few years for immigration has been absolutely mental. Back in 2015 I wasn't as big on it, but we've like doubled or tripled our intake since then. Finding a job right now is fucking impossible and most people I know in their twenties are still living at home cause they know how fucked the rental market is. I'm not against providing aid for asylum seekers, but we're clearly pushing things way past the point where it's sustainable, and just making life shitter and shitter for the working class.

Good anything to split the vote, as much as people might kvetch about Farage being controlled opposition he's one of the few political figures that the average man on the street doesn't actively hate.
At this stage, I think the best position is the accelerationist position. It does mean you're gonna get 5 years of labour, and depending on flavour-of-the-month identity politics that will be insufferable in it's own right, but the current paradigm shift can only begin if the tories are absolutely fucking destroyed.
 
I'm not against providing aid for asylum seekers, but we're clearly pushing things way past the point where it's sustainable
if you accept responsibility for asylum seekers then you hand over any right to say 'enough.' when self sacrifice is a moral imperative then any show of self interest is abhorrent.
even if the point is sustainability l, a more protracted and effective service, that accounts only for the collective 'asylum seekers' and not individuals, who are the objects of morality.
if that is unimportant, why provide aid at all?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Squawking Macaw
if you accept responsibility for asylum seekers then you hand over any right to say 'enough.' when self sacrifice is a moral imperative then any show of self interest is abhorrent.
even if the point is sustainability l, a more protracted and effective service, that accounts only for the collective 'asylum seekers' and not individuals, who are the objects of morality.
if that is unimportant, why provide aid at all?
If you want to be altruistic. Then you could simply state that the our ability to give only extends for as much as we can realistically afford to give. Past that point, all we're doing is turning our own country into a shithole to try to help people out who have come from a shithole, which at the end of the day, isn't really helping them. We'd also be tanking our ability to give assistance in the future.

I believe you can give help without completely falling into "never being able to say no".

I believe that the powers that be just don't say "no" because they have ulterior motives. Whether it be importing a foreign voter-base that will keep you in power, or in persuit of GDP growth at any cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ApeBass
Back