Tories win Staffordshire by-election triggered by Reform UK scandal
But Mr Titley resigned less than a fortnight later, with personal reasons cited for his departure. In the days between his election and resignation, controversy had swirled on social media as comments attributed to his Facebook account about illegal boat crossings came to light.
Former Stafford Borough councillor Ray Barron, who stood as a Reform UK candidate at the May elections, had hoped to retain the Eccleshall & Gnosall seat for the party that swept to power two months ago. He lost out then in the Stafford South East seat, which was held by veteran Conservative councillor Ann Edgeller.
READ MORE: Japanese knotweed heat map shows the hotspots in Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire
READ MORE: 'I visited Alton Towers this summer and was staggered by the queue times'
Now in the early hours of Friday (July 18) he has had to settle for third place however, with 938 votes, after Councillor Pert won the Eccleshall & Gnosall by-election by a sizeable margin. He took the top spot with 1,689 votes.
Green Party candidate and fellow borough councillor Scott Spencer was in second place with 1,037 votes. Labour's Leah Elston-Thompson was in fourth place with 140 votes.
Overall turnout at Thursday's by-election was 34.8% - higher than some areas of Stafford Borough saw in the May poll.
Before his May unseating, Councillor Pert had served as a cabinet member on the Conservative administration. He is also the current opposition group leader at Stafford Borough Council.
Following his victory at Gnosall Memorial Village Hall, he said: "None of us expected to see a by-election so early on and none of us wanted that. Thank you to everyone for coming out and voting. The work starts now. I have been elected by the residents of Eccleshall and Gnosall and I am here to support them. There is a significant amount of casework that we need to sort out and there is a whole range of issues. Some residents are suffering from the speed of traffic, while other residents are suffering with the threat of rampant housing development. I have eight years' experience running a cabinet department. I am sure that experience can be very useful to the wider council."
The by-election result means that the Conservatives now hold 11 county council seats. Reform UK have 48 out of 62, while Labour, Green and Stafford Borough Independents each have one seat.
Staffordshire County Council Eccleshall & Gnosall Division by-election result
Ray Barron (Reform UK) 938 Leah Elston-Thompson (Labour) 140 Jeremy Pert (Conservative) 1,689 ELECTED Scott Spencer (Green Party) 1,037
Number of rejected papers: 1
Turnout: 34.8%
Get daily headlines and breaking news emailed to you - it's FREE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
What polls show about a very confusing political landscape
Donald Trump Election pollsFacebookTweetLink Follow The political landscape right now is more confusing than a corn maze. For every data point that suggests Republicans face headwinds, there seems to be another that suggests Democrats should hold their britches. It all leaves this political analyst wondering just what the heck is going on out there, to paraphrase the great Vince Lombardi. Let's start with President Donald Trump's approval rating. Gallup released a poll last week putting Trump's approval rating (37%), way down from the beginning of his second term (47%). The poll made a lot of press. Then you have the Wall Street Journal survey, which got a lot less play and showed something very different. Trump's net approval ratings among registered voters (approval - disapproval), while still negative at -6 percentage points, have barely declined from earlier this year. His approval rating of 46% looks a lot like it did at the start of the year. There are even surveys that have Trump's approval rating basically equal to his disapproval rating. Diving deeper into the data can leave one more befuddled, even when looking at the averages. Trump's approval rating with independents is lower than any president at this point in office. Yet he's lost very little ground with Republicans since the beginning of the year. This is important because there are a lot of them (e.g. see the section below this one). The average overall, regardless of how you compute the average, still does have Trump's net approval negative. That's where I think it is. Yet, I can't guarantee it. We've seen too many times in the last decade that the range of the results gave us a better understanding of the potential outcomes than the average did at pinpointing where things would end up. Pollsters will almost always ask how people identify themselves: Democrat, Republican or independent. Then they'll follow that up by asking independents whether they lean toward the Democratic or Republican side of the aisle. Party identification is one of the fundamental variables to understand how people will vote. Most Democrats will vote for Democratic candidates, while most Republicans will vote for Republican candidates. No wonder a lot of people took note of the Pew Research Center's annual benchmark poll that was released last week that showed 46% of the country were Republican or leaned Republican to 45% who were Democratic or leaned Democratic. That margin is no different from last year's version of the poll, before Trump won the presidency again. Pew's data, however, isn't the only data. I asked Quinnipiac University for their polls conducted during roughly the same period. Quinnipiac shows a pretty clear swing to the Democrats over the course of the year. During the January-to-February period, Republicans (including leaners) held a 1- to 3-point advantage on party affiliation. Democrats, however, were ahead by 2 to 4 points in the April and June polls. This included two 4-point edges in both June surveys they put into the field. I don't know who is right. The truth probably lies somewhere in between. Democrats may be slightly ahead, though that's not great on a metric where they have usually been ahead over the years. This question is one of my favorites. It asks respondents some form of 'would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate from your district?' The polling does seem to have the Democrats up. The Journal has them up narrowly among registered voters by 3 points. A Reuters/Ipsos poll from June finds the parties about evenly matched, with Democrats at 40% to Republicans' 38%. This is well behind the pace of where Democrats were in either 2005 or 2017 — the years before they won wave elections in the midterms. The Democratic lead in those cycles was closer to 7 points. Confused? You haven't seen anything yet. Ipsos' poll actually looks no different from their final poll on the subject in 2024, the year Republicans held on to the House. The Journal poll, which is one of Trump's better ones, shows the Democrats gaining significantly from its final survey in 2024, when Republicans were up by 4 points. But the seat-by-seat landscape in the House isn't the most appealing for Democrats. Both the Cook Political Report and Inside Elections show more potential pickup opportunities for the Republicans than Democrats. This is without any pro-Republican redistricting that might occur in Texas — or potential pro-Democratic redistricting in other states as retaliation for whatever Texas does. Democrats had more pickup chances than Republicans by this point in both 2005 and especially 2017, according to Cook. I should point out, however, that Democrats don't need a wave to take back the House. They need a small gain given the GOP's razor-thin majority. But with a smaller-than-usual lead on the generic ballot for Democrats and potential redistricting, that may not happen. All of this leaves me a little befuddled. I believe Trump is more unpopular than not. Given that fact, I believe Republicans are in clear trouble for 2026. I'd probably have said the same thing during the 2022 cycle, when Joe Biden's approval rating was awful heading into those midterms. And while Democrats lost the House that fall, Republicans barely pulled it off. This cycle strikes me as even more confusing. And who can forget the most important variable? It's still 2025. It was only months before the 2022 midterms that Roe v. Wade got overturned and gave Democrats a political shot in the arm. We have a long way to go.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump unloads in late-night rants threatening to prosecute news networks, Beyonce, Oprah and Kamala Harris
Despite the lateness of the hour in Scotland, Donald Trump remained vocal on social media Saturday, unleashing a late-night rant in which he threatened to prosecute Kamala Harris, Oprah Winfrey and Beyonce while lashing out at news networks whose 'licenses could, and should, be revoked.' The president, who is spending the weekend golfing in the UK, wrote at 7.45 p.m. ET (12.45 a.m. local BST) that he was reviewing the large amount of money spent by his Democratic opponents 'probably illegally' during the 2024 election. Trump claimed Beyonce was paid $11 million to endorse Harris, and that she 'never sang, not one note, and left the stage to a booing and angry audience!' He also claimed that Democrats paid $3 million in 'expenses' to Oprah and $600,000 to civil rights activist and TV personality Reverend Al Sharpton. There is no evidence that any of the people named in Trump's rant were paid for their endorsement by the Democratic campaign. 'YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PAY FOR AN ENDORSEMENT. IT IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL TO DO SO,' the president wrote in a Truth Social post. 'Can you imagine what would happen if politicians started paying for people to endorse them. All hell would break out!' 'Kamala, and all of those that received Endorsement money, BROKE THE LAW. They should all be prosecuted!' he added. Oprah previously said she 'was not paid a dime' to appear alongside Harris, whose campaign covered $1 million in production costs for a live-streamed event. 'The people who worked on that production needed to be paid. And were. End of story,' Oprah said at the time. The Harris campaign also has denied ever paying Beyonce for her endorsement. The campaign similarly paid her production company Parkwood Production Media LLC $165,000, according to Federal Elections Commission records. Beyonce's mother Tina Knowles previously said the accusation that her daughter was paid for her endorsement is a 'lie' and that Beyonce also paid for the flights for herself and her team to and from the event. It's not the first time that Trump has targeted Beyonce and other celebrities over their alleged 'illegal campaign donations' late at night. The president lashed out at the Lemonade singer as well as Bruce Springsteen and Bono in a 2 a.m. Truth Social post on May 19. In another pair of posts shortly after 1 a.m. while still in Scotland, Trump threatened NBC and ABC, and suggested that networks he believes are 'political pawns for the Democrat Party' should be stripped of their licenses to broadcast. 'It has become so outrageous that, in my opinion, their licenses could, and should, be revoked! MAGA,' he wrote Trump has also routinely used threats of legal action to threaten media outlets, publishers and journalists over what he perceives as antagonistic coverage. Following lawsuits against the networks during his campaign, Trump reached massive financial settlements with both ABC News and CBS News, sparking fears among press freedom advocates. Such fears have not been allayed, after the president this week filed a $10 billion lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch, The Wall Street Journal and its parent companies, as well as two journalists, following the newspaper's publication of the president's alleged birthday letter to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. That suit came fresh of the back of a $16 million settlement with Paramount for a lawsuit concerning the editing of an episode of 60 Minutes interview with Harris, which the president claimed was unfair to his campaign.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
'I'm not sitting down,' Former NC Gov. Cooper hints at run for US in 2026
RALEIGH, N.C. (QUEEN CITY NEWS) — Former Governor Roy Cooper hinted at another run for office during a speech to North Carolina Democrats in Raleigh Saturday night, but stopped short of announcing his candidacy for US Senate. It's widely expected he will run for the seat currently held by retiring Senator Thom Tillis. PREVIOUS: Former Gov. Roy Cooper may announce plans to run for Senate During his remarks at the NC Democrats' Unity Dinner, Cooper talked about policy accomplishments, including Medicaid expansion and teacher pay raises. He also argued that more needs to be done to address wealth disparities. While he didn't announce his run, he made clear he's not done with public service. In the middle of his speech, he called on fellow democrats who were running for office to stand up. 'Everybody who's planning to run for office next year…Stand up, guys…let's give them a big hand…hey, I'm not sitting down, am I?' That line received the biggest round of applause of the evening. And while Cooper wouldn't get into specifics, many in the room treated the campaign as already underway, including the keynote speaker, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, a potential presidential candidate in 2028. 'Roy, I know I speak for Democratic Governors across the country when I say we can't wait to support you in the next stage of your career, delivering for the people of North Carolina,' said Pritzker. Cooper's advisors tell Queen City News he will announce his plans in the coming days. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
