Historic Victory in Manchester, Ground Game Defeats the Algorithm
The Greens’ spectacular victory in Manchester was a victory for grassroots politics, a defeat for fascism and for the disinformation and dirty tricks which plagued the campaign.
Reform threw everything at this constituency but was beaten despite media over-exposure and bias. The cruelly dubbed ‘Matt Badloss’ was typically sour in defeat, resorting to dog-whistle politics and smears that have become his trademark muttering bitterly about “a coalition of Islamists and woke progressives”.
In sharp contrast, the Greens ran a campaign focusing on the cost of living, defending the NHS and opposition to genocide, and mobilising a powerful inter-generational multi-cultural coalition that proved unstoppable. Their charismatic candidate, Hannah Spencer said:
“We’ve rejected hate and embraced the politics of hope. People are sick of being told there is no alternative.”
To get a sense of history, Labour has not lost an election here since 1931. Professor John Curtice said:
“There are particular elections we all remember.. this is going to be up with those in the history books and in our political memory. This is a seismic event.”
The Green Party now has more MPs elected under its party banner than Reform does. But to achieve this victory the Green Party had to overcome overwhelming media bias.
As Aaron Bastani pointed out: “No Green politician, or Green adjacent figure, on the BBC’s flagship panel show – on the same night they won the most extraordinary by-election of my lifetime. It was the same story last week, too. The Greens overcame the BBC psy-op & won a majority of over 4000.”
Media Onslaught
In the run-up to the vote, figures like Kate Ferguson, Political Editor at the Sun on Sunday tweeted out: “EXCL: Zack Polanski overheard speaking loudly on his phone on a train saying he is not confident The Greens will win in today’s byelection, source tells me.”
The attacks on the Greens and on their candidate was relentless. Sarah Vine, ‘Columnist of the Year’ called Zack Polanski ‘the biggest creep in British politics’.
Allister Heather in the Telegraph was struggling to cope, calling the Green Party’s campaign ‘evil’ and suggesting this is how ‘Britain’s democracy dies’.
A key aspect of this victory is the extent to which Labour have lost the mantle of being the only option to defeat Reform. As Jonny Ball writes [The Green victory changes everything]:
“The Greens have now staked their claim to the mantle of Britain’s foremost progressive party, with their first seat in the North, in a safe red citadel, trouncing Labour’s always-dubious claim that “only Labour can beat Reform”. Labour is no longer the “stop Reform” tactical option in our fragmenting system. They weren’t in Caerphilly last year, and they weren’t in Gorton and Denton last night.”
Secondly, in an era of online distortion and misinformation, the operation on the ground has become the key tool in defeating the algorithm. This was true in New York when Zohran Mamdani’s team engaged with thousands of people face-to-face and it was true in Manchester when the Green Party mobilised thousands of party supporters to organise. The Green Party wouldn’t have been able to do that only a year ago.
As with Mamdani, Hannah Spencer and the Greens endured relentless smears and lies – in this case including claims that Polanski plans to turn our playgrounds into crack dens and daughters into sex workers. But this didn’t work.
Neither did the attempt to smear the Greens for supporting Palestine. Much of the MSM seems simply incapable of understanding that public opinion is firmly against Israeli atrocities and Britain’s complicity.
As the author Bruno Maçães has noted: “Harris lost in great measure because of her position on Gaza. Mamdani won in great measure because of his position on Gaza. Polanski won in great measure because of his position on Gaza. But read most commentary and these facts are stubbornly ignored.”
Election Dirty Tricks and ‘Family Voting’
In the end, the personal attacks failed because they were both ridiculous and only showed-up the emptiness of the political arguments against the Greens. However, significant questions were raised about tactics used and the ability of electoral bodies, and the law to regulate elections.
Matt Goodwin was in court the week of the byelection accused of publishing misleading leaflets: Everything we know as Reform UK to face three-hour hearing amid Gorton and Denton by-election campaign – Manchester Evening News
But this was all after the fact.
Labour were accused of creating a fake Tactical Choice website directing voters to vote Labour to keep out Reform. Zack Polanski Calls Labour To Apologise For Fake Tactical Voting Company | HuffPost UK Politics
Turn Left Media reported: “They now have vans driving around warning of a ‘Green Madness’. One Labour branded bus was seen outside a polling station (which is illegal).”
The National reported: ‘Police have confirmed they are investigating allegations Labour broke election laws before their Gorton and Denton by-election defeat’.
Police confirm ‘Green madness’ van probe as Labour silent | The National
In defeat Reform have reverted to type, complaining to the Electoral Commission of evidence of ‘family voting’. This is instances when family members are seen to be entering the voting booth together or where there is suspicion of coercion.
But as journalist Sangita Myska has pointed out: “32 cases of “apparent family collusion” in the Gorton and Denton by-election would be 32 too many, if accurate. But for context, it’s 32 apparent cases out of a total of 76,524 registered voters. The observation group was funded by a Tory Peer, that didn’t report its findings at time – meaning the claim couldn’t be verified.”
The accusations arose as it became clear that Reform was going to lose.
Author and journalist Gary Younge noted: “The emergence of ‘family voting” as an issue and “democracy volunteers” as a force over the last two hours does not just smack of desperation. It’s a dangerous slur on an entire community and a disgrace on those peddling it.”
Paisley Pattern
Anas Sarwar and his colleagues meet today in Paisley for a one-day conference, in timing they might not have hoped for.
Gathering in the immediate aftermath of a historic defeat, Sarwar and the Secretary of State for Scotland Douglas Alexander remain at loggerheads over whether Keir Starmer should stay or go. It appeared as if Alexander was attempting to assert his authority over the Scottish leader by pronouncing that Sarwar should stay in his lane.
Douglas Alexander tells Anas Sarwar ‘not to commentate on UK politics’ | The National
The unfortunate meeting comes as results from the Scottish Election Study produce more bad news for the beleaguered comrades. Even The Scotsman’s Andrew Learmonth was moved to write:
“Latest from Scottish Election Study is absolutely brutal for Scottish Labour. Fewer than a third of those who backed the party in 2024 will back them in May. 14% have switched to Reform UK and 13% to the SNP.”
The Gorton and Denton result has piled pressure on the Prime Minister, with commentators saying that he might go after the ‘local elections’ in May. The problem for Scottish Labour is that they have joint heads of their campaign saying different things. One openly saying he is a disaster, the other backing the lame duck PM. It doesn’t make any sense and it will be impossible to campaign effectively. As recent polling has shown us [A Catastrophic Collapse and a Holyrood Majority], the idea that Sarwar’s failed coup would be some liberation is a fantasy.
Gorton and Denton makes the coming Senedd and Holyrood elections much harder for Labouras it staggers on in political incoherence.
Anas Sarwar…..leader of “Scottish” Labour.
Douglas Alexander….member of “Scottish” Labour.
But somehow it’s Wee Dougie dishing out the orders to Comrade Sarwar.
Could it possibly be because “Scottish” Labour is both a figment and a branch office (Johann Lamont) run from and by London.
Reform were overwhelmingly backed by the votes of the white working class whereas the Greens were voted in on the Muslim vote (30% of Gortons population).
I’m not sure why Gaza should be a ‘Green’ issue?
The 3 traditional ‘centrist’ parties vote was wiped out.
The author might take pleasure at the result but as the UK (especially parts of inner city England) descend into sectarianism I for one fear for the future stability of the country.
You can’t possibly know what you assert in your first sentence. It just reflects your own prejudices.
No it doesn’t. It’s an accurate summation of the voting patterns, whereas your comment reflects your own prejudices.
No John you are just repeating rubbish from Mat Goodwin an extremely ungracious loser. He didn’t even clap the victor or attempt to shake her hand but just stood there looking surly.
Hannah Spencer was a white plumber and plasterer and the Reform candidate was a former University lecturer. I think the working class candidate won in this instance. Just not the sort of working class person that the former city trader Farage or his hedge fund backers recognise because she can think for herself and work things out for herself rather than being told who to hate by Farage.
Sorry John, the Muslim vote won it for the greens who explicitly campaigned to win this vote, as I say what the hell has Gaza got to do with inner Manchester?
If your happy with sectarianism entering into UK politics that’s fine but I’m not.
John – I feel your hurt that your billionaire backed, university lecturer, racist poster boy got defeated by a local lass. Hannah Spencer won the election for one reason and one reason only – she got 40% of the votes from the voters in the constituency which was considerably more than any other candidate. The rest of Reform UK and your excuses for defeat is bollocks.
Actually I don’t feel your hurt I laugh at the fact that you cannot handle this and feel the need to try to introduce a racist narrative to explain away a simple electoral victory for a personable, down to earth local woman.
John L – last comment . The Muslim community like every other voter of whatever religion are allowed to vote for whoever they like whether you or I like their choice or not.
If most Muslim voters voted for the Green Party it is not sectarian it is voting for a party that listened to them and does not demonise them.
Reform and Tories are quite openly Islamophobic so it is hardly a surprise that a Muslim voter would not vote for them. Most Muslim’s used to vote Labour (~85%) but Labour has become increasingly hostile to Muslim community and consequently has lost a lot of votes especially from the younger generations.
The Westminster governments complicity in aiding the Israeli government’s genocide in Gaza(most experts on genocide consider it meets definition) and this upsets many people both Muslim and non Muslim. This is similar to the 2005 election when many people’s vote was based on their opposition to Labour government’s involvement in Iraq. If foreign affairs is the deciding factor on how someone votes this is completely legitimate and neither you nor I have any right to pontificate on it.
Lastly Luke Tryl of More In Common has said this evening that the two biggest issues raised by both Muslim and non Muslim voters in by election was surprise, surprise cost of living and state of public services. The very issues Hannah Spencer raised in her acceptance speech.
In short by making accusations of sectarianism against a specific section of society you are actually displaying the very sectarianism you are accusing others of.
What you are claiming is that the party whose leader is a gay Jewish guy and whose representative was a white women who is a plumber and owns a couple of greyhounds that has attracted Muslim voters to vote for them is sectarianism?
@John Learmonth, the Israeli destruction of Gaza is a ‘Green’ issue because:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_Gaza_war
See also Environmental Warfare in Gaza by Shourideh C Molavi (2024) for what went on before the current genocide. For an earlier work focusing mainly on the USAmerican military, see The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism by Barry Sanders (2009) which highlights the enormous consumption of combat jet fuel. For a view on how settler colonialism impacts ecologies and environments, Dark Laboratory: on Columbus, the Caribbean and the origins of the climate crisis by Tao Leigh Goffe (2025) is an interesting case study, particularly on the experimental mindset towards risks and hazards.
Ravaging the land has been a common military tactic, whilst settler colonialists have often tried to exterminate species that indigenous peoples relied upon (American bison, say, or Palestinian orange and olive trees whose fruit were a major export). Wikipedia says that the story of Romans salting the land of defeated Carthage to prevent plants growing is possibly apocryphal, although it may be based on earlier stories. Israel has been spraying toxins, bulldozing farmland, cutting down trees and introducing foreign species like European pine to cover up Palestinian settlements whose human population has been evicted long before this genocide.
Some Christian Zionists apparently welcome the genocide in Gaza as heralding a final apocalyptic (possibly nuclear) conflict which would likely be the worst case of human-wrought ecocide ever.
But you don’t have to resort to literature. If you look at before-and-after satellite images of the Gaza strip, perhaps the penny will finally drop for you. It’s a ‘Green’ issue, alright.
In yer heid, Johnny! 🙂