Download
← All fact checksAfternoon run · November 9, 2026 · #10 by reach
PoliticsStatistic

Is Lord Ashcroft's poll dishonest because he's a Tory donor and not a BPC member?

Is Lord Ashcroft's poll showing Reform third on 18%, 13 points behind Labour, 'dishonest'? Did his polling have Reform at 21% in May when it got 28%, and is he not a British Polling Council member, as Nigel Farage claims?

Misleading

Real facts about the pollster, arranged to imply a finding the evidence does not support.

Nigel Farage's post is MISLEADING. Lord Ashcroft is a long-standing Conservative donor, his polling firm is not a British Polling Council member, and his May survey did put Reform on 21%. But the November poll (Reform 18%) was published with its method and matched other pollsters' trend. Comparing a national voting-intention figure with a local election result is not a like-for-like test.

+7Sources ↓Original post ↗

Claims

✓ 2 true

The polling is 'totally dishonest' and has been 'proven as bogus time and time again'.129

“This is totally dishonest polling... his polling has been proven as bogus time and time again.”

~ MisleadingCentral claimHigh confidence

The charge of dishonesty is not backed by anything in the record. Ashcroft's method is published: he asks voters how likely they are to back each party at the next election, rather than in a hypothetical election tomorrow. That is a different question from a local election result, which is what makes the 21%-versus-28% comparison invalid. The November survey - Labour 31%, Conservatives 26%, Reform 18%, 5,253 adults, fieldwork 29 October to 2 November - broadly matched what other pollsters were finding, and Luke Tryl of More in Common said it aligned with their numbers. Ashcroft was also among the first to record Reform slipping to third. The post is made by the leader of the party the poll damages and offers no methodological evidence, only the pollster's identity and party ties. The decisive point is that the poll's method is disclosed and externally consistent, so 'bogus' does not follow from the facts given.

Still open: Ashcroft's polls are not BPC-audited, so their internal weighting cannot be checked to that standard; the question is whether that gap justifies calling them dishonest.

The poll was conducted by a Tory donor.14

“Tory donor”

✓ TrueHigh confidence

This part holds up. Lord Ashcroft is a former Conservative Party deputy chairman and treasurer and a long-standing major donor to the Conservatives. The poll is an Ashcroft Polls survey published in the Mail on Sunday. Calling him a 'Tory donor' is therefore accurate. What the label does not do on its own is show that the poll is wrong: his firm now polls commercially and his party ties are a reason to look closely at the method, not a finding about the numbers. The post treats the identity of the pollster as if it were evidence about the data. That is the move that makes the overall post misleading rather than simply wrong.

Ashcroft is not a member of the British Polling Council.3410

“who isn’t even a member of the British Polling Council”

✓ TrueHigh confidence

British Polling Council minutes record that Sir John Curtice repeatedly invited Lord Ashcroft to join and that, under the membership criteria adopted - requiring an independent organisation polling for more than one client - Ashcroft was not eligible. Contemporary reporting and later profiles state plainly that Ashcroft Polls sits outside the BPC. So the factual claim is correct. Its relevance is more limited than the post implies: BPC membership commits a pollster to published methods and disclosure rules, and Ashcroft does publish his method, but non-membership is not itself a finding of bad data. The post uses a true administrative fact as if it demonstrated fabrication.

Ashcroft had Reform on 21% in May and Reform achieved 28% in the May local elections.5678

“He had us at 21% in May and we achieved 28%”

~ Partly trueModerate confidence

The 21% figure checks out. Lord Ashcroft's late-April survey, published in early May, had Reform on 21% with the Conservatives and Greens on 20 and Labour on 18, and his 21-26 May survey also had Reform on 21%. The 28% figure is at the top of the reported range for Reform's national equivalent vote share in the 7 May local elections: the BBC's analysis put Reform on 26% and Sky News's early projection on 27%, while some aggregators cite 28%. Two further points weaken the comparison. First, the May 21% survey had fieldwork dated after the local elections, so it cannot be read as a prediction that the elections then contradicted. Second, and more fundamentally, a general-election voting-intention question and a local-election equivalent vote share are different measures. The numbers are roughly real; the use made of them is not sound.

Still open: Different outlets computed Reform's national equivalent vote share slightly differently (26%, 27%, 28%), so the 'achieved 28%' line is defensible only as the top of that range.

A text-only post: there was no media to test.

What was posted

X

A text-only post on X by Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, attacking a Mail on Sunday poll that put Reform on 18%. It argues the poll is dishonest because the pollster is a Conservative donor outside the British Polling Council, and says the polling has already been proven wrong because it had Reform on 21% in May when the party took 28% in the local elections.

“This is totally dishonest polling by Tory donor who isn’t even a member of the British Polling Council. He had us at 21% in May and we achieved 28% - his polling has been proven as bogus time and time again.”

Posted on Nigel Farage's public X account over the weekend of 7-8 November 2026, after Lord Ashcroft's Mail on Sunday poll was published. The post is a comment by the leader of the party the poll placed third.

Who posted it

X
@nigel_farage

Account 10 years old

View the account on X ↗

Account check

Looks like a genuine account90%
Likelihood of automation10%

Estimates from public signals — account age, posting pattern, audience — not a judgement of the person behind the account, and separate from whether this post is true.

What stood out

  • Nigel Farage is a prominent British politician, known for his leadership roles in UKIP and Reform UK, and his tenure as a Member of the European Parliament.
  • The Twitter handle @nigel_farage is widely recognized as his official account, with numerous reputable sources confirming its authenticity.
  • Farage's official social media accounts are listed on VerifiedHandles.org, including his Twitter handle @nigel_farage.
  • The account has been active for several years, with a substantial follower count, indicating genuine engagement and influence.
  • There have been instances of impersonation and fake accounts associated with Farage, highlighting the importance of verifying official accounts.
Signals (4)+
Posting cadence
Regular
Follower ratio
High
Notable news coverage
Farage's official social media accounts are listed on VerifiedHandles.org, including his Twitter handle @nigel_farage.
Fact check history
Instances of impersonation and fake accounts associated with Farage have been reported, emphasizing the need for verification.

Account checked October 23, 2026, 03:10 UTC

Sources

10 sources reviewed

Further reading

  • 1The Independent The fullest account of the November poll figures and Ashcroft's reply to Farage.
  • 3British Polling Council The primary record of why Ashcroft was not eligible to join the British Polling Council.
  • 9Lord Ashcroft Ashcroft's own explanation of his polling method, which is central to judging the 'bogus' charge.
  • 7The Conversation Explains the BBC's calculation of Reform's national equivalent vote share in the May local elections.

The full story

The kernel of truth is that every ingredient Farage names is real. Lord Ashcroft is a former Conservative deputy chairman and treasurer and a long-standing donor. His polling firm is outside the British Polling Council. And his May surveys did put Reform on 21%.

What the post does is arrange those real pieces to imply a conclusion they do not support. The November poll - Labour 31%, Conservatives 26%, Reform 18%, 5,253 adults, fieldwork 29 October to 2 November - was published with its method disclosed. Ashcroft asks how likely people are to vote for each party at the next election, not how they would vote tomorrow. That is a legitimate design choice, and it is why his figures cannot be lined up against a local election result.

The comparison itself is the weak joint. A local election national equivalent vote share is a projection from council contests with different turnout and different stakes; a national voting-intention poll asks a different question entirely. Ashcroft himself made this point, and noted that Farage had not complained when his polls showed Reform nine points ahead.

The poll also did not come out of nowhere. Its trend was broadly in line with other pollsters, Luke Tryl of More in Common said the numbers matched what others were finding, and Ashcroft was among the first to record Reform slipping to third. That is the opposite of what a fabricated or 'bogus' poll would look like.

Kernel of truth

Lord Ashcroft really is a long-standing Conservative donor, his firm is not a BPC member, and his May polls really did have Reform on 21%.

Timeline

  1. May 2026

    Lord Ashcroft's late-April survey, published in early May, puts Reform on 21%, Conservatives 20, Greens 20, Labour 18. 6The Canary

  2. May 7, 2026

    Local elections in England: BBC analysis puts Reform's national equivalent vote share at 26%, with Sky's early projection at 27%. 7The Conversation

  3. May 26, 2026

    Ashcroft's 21-26 May survey has Reform on 21%, Conservatives 21.1, Labour 19.2. 5Polling Forecast

  4. November 8, 2026

    Ashcroft's Mail on Sunday poll (fieldwork 29 October-2 November, 5,253 adults) puts Labour 31, Conservatives 26, Reform 18; Farage attacks it on X as 'totally dishonest' and 'bogus'. 1The Independent

How it was framed

Misleading contentFalse connection

Genuine facts - the pollster's party donations, his BPC status and his May figure - are framed to suggest the November poll is fabricated. The May local election result is connected to a national voting-intention poll as if the two were a fair test of accuracy.

  • Emotional language. 'totally dishonest', 'proven as bogus time and time again'.
  • Us vs. them. Sets 'Tory donor' against Reform's result, framing the poll as an attack by a party opponent.
  • Missing context. Omits that Ashcroft's method asks about the next election rather than tomorrow, and that a local election equivalent vote share is not a like-for-like comparison.
  • Selective evidence. Cites the May 21% figure but not Ashcroft's other polls or the November poll's alignment with other pollsters.

Posted on Nigel Farage's public X account on the weekend of 7-8 November 2026, after the Mail on Sunday published the Ashcroft poll. Farage is leader of Reform UK, the party the poll placed third.

Bias

NoneSlightModerateStrong

Leans pro-Reform UK / self-interested attack on a pollster. The post is written by the leader of the party the poll damages and seeks to discredit the survey rather than engage with its findings, using loaded language ('totally dishonest', 'bogus') and selective comparisons. Farage has previously cited Ashcroft's polls approvingly when they favoured UKIP and Reform, which is not acknowledged.

Bias describes how the post frames its message — the slant of the language, selection and emphasis — and is judged separately from whether the claim is true. A true claim can still be framed with a strong slant.

How we checked

1 min 7 s
  1. 1

    We ran searches on the poll, the pollster and the British Polling Council, including the post's own wording.

  2. 2

    We read reporting on the November poll and Farage's reaction, including Ashcroft's reply.

  3. 3

    We checked the May polling tables and the reported national equivalent vote share from the 7 May local elections.

  4. 4

    We checked British Polling Council minutes and reporting on Ashcroft's membership status.

  5. 5

    We reviewed Ashcroft's own account of his method.

  6. 6

    No media authenticity check was run: the post is text only and there is no image, video or audio to assess.

✓ Claim checked– Media not applicable✓ Sources checked

Why 82% confidence

High

We are highly confident in the MISLEADING verdict because the underlying facts are well documented across independent sources and Ashcroft's method is set out in his own words. The PARTLY_TRUE claim on the 21% and 28% figures carries a lower band because different outlets computed the local election equivalent vote share as 26%, 27% or 28%.

Limits. Ashcroft Polls is not BPC-audited, so we could not inspect its internal weighting to that standard. We did not run any automated media analysis because there is no media in the post.

What we don’t know

  • Whether Ashcroft's internal weighting would pass a BPC-style audit, since the firm is outside that system.
  • The precise national equivalent vote share figure for Reform in the May local elections, which different outlets put at 26%, 27% or 28%.

Spot it yourself

Spot the fake

Looks suspicious, isn’t proof

  • The poster is the leader of the party damaged by the poll, so he has an interest in the result. That is a reason to check, not proof the poll is wrong.
  • The language is heated - 'totally dishonest', 'bogus'. Strong wording signals a fight, not a finding.
  • The pollster has party ties and is outside the British Polling Council. Both facts are true but neither shows the numbers are fabricated.

The actual evidence

  • The poll's method is published: Ashcroft asks about likelihood to vote at the next election, not a hypothetical election tomorrow.
  • The November figures matched the trend in YouGov, Opinium and Ipsos, and More in Common's Luke Tryl said they aligned with other pollsters.
  • The May comparison is invalid: a national voting-intention poll and a local election national equivalent vote share measure different things.
  • The 21% May survey had fieldwork dated after the local elections, so it could not have been a prediction the elections then contradicted.
  1. 1

    Find the poll's method before judging its numbers

    Look for the pollster's published tables or a statement of how the question was asked. Here the difference between 'next election' and 'tomorrow' explains much of the gap, and Ashcroft sets it out himself.

  2. 2

    Check whether the comparison is like-for-like

    A local election national equivalent vote share is a projection from council results; a voting-intention poll is a survey. Ask whether the two numbers are measuring the same thing before treating one as a check on the other.

  3. 3

    See whether other pollsters show the same trend

    A single poll can be wrong; a trend across several independent firms is harder to fake. Here the November result was in line with YouGov, Opinium and Ipsos.

  4. 4

    Separate the pollster's identity from the poll's quality

    Party donations and BPC membership are worth knowing, but ask what they actually prove. Neither tells you whether the sampling and weighting were sound.

  5. 5

    Check the dates on the survey you are being shown

    The May 21% survey had fieldwork after the local elections. A poll cannot be a failed prediction if it was taken after the event it supposedly got wrong.

Takeaway

A post can be built entirely from true facts and still mislead, because the conclusion depends on how those facts are connected. Check the comparison, not just the ingredients.

Questions people ask

Is Lord Ashcroft a Tory donor?+

Yes. Lord Ashcroft is a former Conservative Party deputy chairman and treasurer and a long-standing major donor to the Conservatives. His polling firm now works commercially and publishes polls in the Mail on Sunday. Being a donor is a fair thing to disclose, but it does not by itself show that a poll's numbers are wrong.

Is Ashcroft Polls a member of the British Polling Council?+

No. British Polling Council minutes record that Sir John Curtice invited Lord Ashcroft to join, and that under the membership criteria adopted he was not eligible. BPC membership commits a pollster to published methods and disclosure rules, but non-membership is not a finding of bad data.

Did Ashcroft have Reform on 21% in May?+

Yes. His late-April survey, published in early May, had Reform on 21%, with the Conservatives and Greens on 20 and Labour on 18. His 21-26 May survey also had Reform on 21%. One point often missed: the May survey's fieldwork came after the local elections, so it was not a prediction the elections then contradicted.

Why is comparing a poll with a local election result misleading?+

A national voting-intention poll asks how people would vote in a general election. A local election national equivalent vote share is a projection from council contests with different turnout and different stakes. They measure different things, so one is not a test of the other. Ashcroft himself made this point in reply to Farage.

What is a national equivalent vote share?+

It is an estimate of how the parties would have done nationally, calculated from local election results across many council areas. Because local contests vary in size and turnout, analysts project a national figure. Different broadcasters and aggregators can reach slightly different numbers, which is why Reform's May figure is reported as 26%, 27% or 28%.

Go deeper

British Polling Council
A body that pollsters can join by committing to publish their methods and data; it does not itself conduct polls or certify that a poll is accurate.
National equivalent vote share
An estimate of how the parties would have performed nationally, projected from local election results across many council areas.
Voting intention poll
A survey asking people which party they would vote for, either in a hypothetical election tomorrow or at the next election.
Fieldwork
The period during which a polling firm interviews respondents; it can fall after an event that the poll is later said to have predicted.
Crossbench peer
A member of the House of Lords who sits outside the party groups; Lord Ashcroft sits as a crossbench peer.

People also search for

Farage Ashcroft polling dishonest Tory donor British Polling CouncilAshcroft Polls not a member BPCReform 18% Ashcroft poll November 2026 Farage reactionReform 21% May poll 28% local elections AshcroftNigel Farage polling bogus Ashcroft
For educators+
Misleading content: true facts arranged to support a false conclusion.False connection: linking two measures (a national poll and a local election result) that are not comparable.Source evaluation: distinguishing what a pollster's identity proves from what the methodology shows.Selective evidence: citing one figure while leaving out the wider trend.
  • Every fact in the post is broadly true. What makes the overall post misleading rather than accurate?
  • If a pollster has party ties, what should you look for before deciding whether to trust the poll?
  • Why might a local election result and a national voting-intention poll give different pictures of the same party's support?

About this check

Platform
X
Posted by
@nigel_farage
Posted
November 8, 2026
Age when checked
1–2 days old when checked
Where it spread
United Kingdom
Audience
UK & EU audience
Language
EN
Status
● Post is live
Verified
November 9, 2026, 15:14 UTC
Published
November 9, 2026, 15:14 UTC

Reach. Farage post: 4,455 likes, 672 replies (X syndication). It quotes the Daily Mail's 'Badenoch storms to eight-point lead over Farage' post. GB News: 'Farage fumes over bogus and dishonest poll'. Left Foot Forward and London Economic also covered it, and Ashcroft responded.

This verdict was generated with AI from the sources shown. AI can make mistakes — check the sources before relying on it.

Check anything yourself, in seconds.

Share any social post or video to What the Fact and get the verdict, the confidence, and the receipts.

Download on theApp StoreGet it onGoogle Play