Advance UK’s campaign in the Gorton and Denton by-election has been seriously set back after a wave of anger, including from within its own ranks, over misogynistic tweets posted by its candidate, Nick Buckley.
The posts, published by Searchlight last night and viewed thousands of times today, contained abusive and degrading remarks about women, particularly young women. In one, Buckley wrote: “Many young British women are whores.”
The revelations triggered an immediate and unusually fierce backlash from people identifying as Advance members, former members, supporters and activists, with women especially prominent among the critics. The scale of the reaction has left the party visibly on the defensive.
Party leader Ben Habib attempted to stem the criticism by insisting Buckley was not a misogynist but a defender and protector of women. Buckley later made the same case in a video response. “All taken out of context” he claimed.
Habib framed the controversy as an attack by Reform UK “attack dogs”, but the defence cut little ice even with those previously sympathetic to Advance.
One self-described supporter wrote: “I like you Ben, I like Advance UK, you could just be exactly what this country needs, but you can’t have a go at Reform for personally attacking Nick when your own endorsed candidates have done the same.”
Another, who said they had been campaigning for the party, was more blunt: “If you can’t read the room, then read the comments. You’ve fucked it, mate.”
Several who claimed to be current or former members went further still. “Even Advance members (now ex-members) are calling you out for the fraud you are,” wrote one.
“I’m Advance and I do not like how he speaks about women! I raised my concerns and neither he or Ben bothered to answer!” posted a female supporter.
Another added: “You showed how weak your party is when you chose him as your candidate, and I thought this all by myself.”
Others questioned the party’s priorities. “Why bother joining Advance UK when the top people care more about taking down Reform than winning elections?” asked one supporter.
Some said they had previously overlooked Buckley’s comments but now found them indefensible. “I unfollowed him for his odd attitude to women a while back,” wrote one self-identified Advance voter.
Another said simply: “The man’s an odious, sexist cretin. You chose him. That’s on you.”
A woman who had engaged in the party’s online spaces added: “As a chubby woman I publicly denounce him also.”
Others dispensed with elaboration altogether: “Women hater.” “Stand down.” “Care to comment on calling British women whores?”
The sense of squandered goodwill was palpable. “I’ve defended you for months,” one supporter wrote to Habib, “but this is indefensible. You’ve completely lost the plot.”
Another asked: “You pick a man who tells women where their place is and then demand we apologise to him?”
A handful attempted to rally behind Buckley, though even these defences were strained. One campaigner insisted Buckley had already answered questions in a two-hour online discussion.
Another wrote simply: “You are a good man, Nick Buckley.”
But such voices were overwhelmed by the scale of the backlash.
Frustration
Strategic frustration also surfaced. One self-described Advance activist asked why senior figures, including Habib, were not visibly campaigning on the ground if the party was serious about winning.
Another mocked the unfolding chaos: “Isn’t this all getting a bit People’s Front of Judea?”
Even among those still attracted to Advance’s stated aims, despair was evident. “You could be exactly what this country needs,” one supporter wrote, “but you’ve spent a year attacking Reform and Farage instead of building policies.”
Another concluded: “You’ve picked a known misogynist as your first man on the ground and sent him out with nothing to stand on.”
Chaos and division
For a party seeking to establish credibility, the episode may prove devastating. Advance UK entered the by-election promising seriousness and renewal on the far right.
Instead it has delivered chaos, division and a candidate it cannot defend without insulting its own supporters.
