Reform now, Restore later? The tactical voting theory emerging in Britain
As anger toward Labour and the Conservatives grows, some voters appear to be backing Reform UK as the immediate vehicle for disruption – while viewing Restore Britain as the longer-term answer
By Gary Chappell
THE local elections appear to have decimated the old guard with one pattern becoming clear – a tactical vote that says: Reform now, Restore later.
At the beginning, Reform and Nigel Farage looked to many like a breath of fresh air. The party that was not, as some put it, “a different cheek of the same arse”.
But as the months went on, it became abundantly clear that Farage was simply one of the very establishment many voters had grown to despise.
This was never clearer than when he welcomed former Tories Nadhim Zahawi, Robert Jenrick and Suella Braverman. For many, the appointment of Zahawi – “vaccines” minister during the response to Covid – was the final nail in the coffin.
Reform took enough votes to humiliate Labour in the local elections on May 7. But instead of an immediate changing of the guard, something more interesting could be taking place:
Tactical voting
The calculation, put simply, is this: Reform now, Restore later.
As it stands today, Reform has become the only genuine electoral threat to the political establishment currently operating at scale. It has infrastructure, national recognition, momentum and polling numbers capable of inflicting serious damage on both Labour and the Conservatives.
And many voters know it.
Recent polling has shown Reform either level with or ahead of both major parties in some national surveys, while local election gains have reinforced the sense that something politically significant is happening beneath Westminster’s feet.
For many frustrated voters, that makes Reform the obvious immediate vehicle for protest.
Not necessarily because they agree with every position. Not necessarily because they see it as politically pure.
But because it has the best chance right now of disrupting the existing order.
It is quite possible that voters hoped Keir Starmer would resign as Labour Prime Minister after results saw his party suffer heavy losses in the local polls. For some voters, that may well have been part of the intention behind backing Reform on Thursday.
Either that or the hope that it would force a General Election. Remember, Starmer’s approval ratings are among the worst recorded for a sitting Prime Minister at this stage of a government.
That would see immediate change and buy Restore the time it needs to expand.
In the one area where Restore-aligned candidates did run – Rupert Lowe’s Great Yarmouth – the movement won all 10 seats it contested; incredible when you consider it is only three months old.
Farage had said that Restore would not even get one per cent of the votes in Great Yarmouth.
Lowe said: “History made. We won 10 out of 10 seats, with overwhelming majorities in every single one.
”Great Yarmouth First, then we Restore Britain. A very special day.”
So it appears that Restore and not Reform, in the view of voters, is the party more willing to confront their concerns directly:
Anger over immigration. Anger over censorship and speech laws. Anger over policing. Anger over the handling of Covid. Anger over the feeling that Britain no longer works for ordinary people.
For some voters, the calculation appears to be this: Reform to break the system open. Restore to shape whatever comes next.
Remarkably, instead of listening to voters, Starmer’s Labour remain tone-deaf, saying: “Labour was elected to change this country. That is what the public want and what they deserve. Tough days like today don’t weaken our determination to deliver that change. They strengthen it.”
So two fingers up, then?
Starmer added: “These are tough results for Labour. There’s no sugarcoating it. We’ve lost brilliant Labour representatives who’ve stood up for their communities.
”People are still frustrated. Their lives aren’t changing fast enough. We haven’t offered enough hope or optimism for the future.
”I was elected to change this country - tough days like this don’t weaken my determination to do that. They strengthen it.
“I’m not going to walk away and plunge the country into chaos.”
Might be a bit late for that.
Results
Reform:
Gained more than 1,300 council seats across England (reports range from 1,300–1,400+ as more results come in).
Took control of multiple councils, including Newcastle-under-Lyme (27 of 44 seats) and others in Essex, Suffolk, and the North East.
Hartlepool: Won every contested seat (all 12 seats), becoming the largest party and stripping Labour of their majority.
Made major gains in traditional Labour strongholds and Conservative areas, including parts of Essex, Suffolk, Thurrock, Sunderland and Plymouth.
Heavy losses inflicted on both Labour (hundreds of seats lost in heartlands) and the Conservatives.
Restore:
Great Yarmouth First (Lowe’s local Restore Britain-aligned project): Won all 10 seats contested.
Did not field candidates nationally, focused only on targeted local efforts in Great Yarmouth.
Has attracted defections from some Reform UK councillors and independents since launching earlier in 2026.
Rupert is getting too much credit for what/who he actually is. Just a noise and a one man band “party “.
He is just a noise.
In Parliament,to be able to implement your policies and succeed,you need 326 elected MPs. Other wise the promises are empty.
He is fooling people.
This was never clearer than when Farage wanted Britain to join Operation Epstein Fury.