Why are we suggesting tactically voting to stop Reform UK?

Why tactical voting?

UK general elections use First Past the Post: in each constituency, whoever gets the most votes wins the seat, even without a majority. When several parties oppose Reform UK in the same seat, their votes can split between them, letting a Reform UK candidate win with a minority of the vote.

What tactical voting means here

If you want to stop a Reform UK candidate winning your seat, voting for your usual first-choice party isn't always the most effective way to do that — especially if that party finished a distant third or fourth last time. Voting instead for whichever non-Reform candidate is genuinely best-placed to win can concentrate the anti-Reform vote behind one candidate.

This is a tool, not a persuasion piece

This site doesn't argue for or against Reform UK's policies. It's built for people who have already decided they want to help prevent a Reform UK win in their constituency, and need the data to work out how best to do that. If that's not your goal, this site isn't for you — and that's fine.

The trade-off

Tactical voting means voting for a candidate or party that might not be your genuine first choice. That's a real trade-off, and only you can decide whether it's one you want to make. This site's job is just to show you the numbers so you can make that decision with accurate information.

Under First Past The Post Reform can win a majority in the House of Commons on as little as 26% of the vote, which is why we think it is so important to vote tactically to keep them out of power. You can see a model of that here: Electoral Calculus prediction .