Zack Polanski and Nigel Farage might be polar opposites when it comes to politics – but they do have one thing in common.

The pair are both cutting through in a changing media landscape when attention is scarce and trust in mainstream politics is scarcer still.

For Farage, the Reform UK leader, momentum has been building since he won a seat at the general election last year and he continues to top the polls.

But in the six weeks since Polanski became leader of the Greens, membership has doubled, they’ve polled higher than ever before while three Labour councillors have defected. Has the insurgent firebrand finally met his match?

“I’m sure I don’t need to say this, but I despise Nigel Farage’s politics and disagree with him on almost everything,” Polanski tells Sky News.

“But I think his storytelling has undoubtedly cut through and so yes there has been a huge part of us saying ‘If Farage can do that with a politics of hate and division, then it’s time for the Green Party to do that with a politics of hope and community’ and that’s absolutely what I intend to keep doing.”

Polanski was speaking after a news conference to announce the defections of the councillors in Swindon – a bellwether area that is currently led by a Labour council and has two Labour MPs, but was previously controlled by the Tories.

It is the sort of story the party would previously have announced in a press release, but the self-described “eco populist” is determined to do things differently to grab attention.

He has done media interviews daily over the past few weeks, launched his own podcast and turbocharged the Greens social media content – producing slick viral videos such as his visit to Handsworth (the Birmingham neighbourhood where Robert Jenrick claimed he saw no white people).

Polanski insists that it is not increased exposure in and of itself that is attracting people to his party but his messaging – he wants to “make hope normal again”.

“I’m not going to be in a wetsuit or be parachuting from a helicopter”, he says in a swipe at Lib Dem leader Ed Davey.

“I think you only need to do stunts if you don’t have something really clear to say and then you need to grab attention.

“I think when you look at the challenges facing this country right now if you talk about taxing wealth and not work, if you talk about the mass inequality in our society and you talk about your solidarity with people living in poverty, with working-class communities, I think these are the things that people both want to hear, but also they want to know our solutions. The good news is I’ve got loads of solutions and the party has loads of solutions. “

Some of those solutions have come under criticism – Reform UK have attacked his policy to legalise drugs and abolish private landlords.

Polanski is confident he can win the fight. He says it helps that he talks “quite quickly because it means that I’m able to be bold but also have nuance”. And he is a London Assembly member not an MP, so he has time to be the party’s cheerleader rather than being bogged down with case work.

As for what’s next, the 42-year-old has alluded to conversations with Labour MPs about defections. He has not revealed who they are but today gave an idea of who he would welcome – naming Starmer critic Richard Burgon.

Like Burgon, Polanski believes Starmer “will be gone by May” and that the local elections for Labour “will be disastrous”.

He wants to replace Labour “right across England and Wales” when voters go to the polls, something Reform UK has also vowed to do.

Could the Greens be kingmakers?

Luke Tryl, director of More in Common, says this reflects a “new axis of competition” as frontline British politics shifts from a battle of left vs right to a battle of process vs anti-establishment.

Farage has been the beneficiary of this battle so far but Tryl says Polanski is “coming up in focus groups” in a way his predecessors didn’t. “He is cutting through”, the pollster says.

However, one big challenge Polanski faces is whether his rise will cause the left vote to fragment and make it easier for Farage to win – something he has said he wants to avoid at all costs.

And yet, asked if he would form a coalition with Labour to keep Farage out of power in the event of a hung parliament, he suggested he would only do so if Sir Keir Starmer is no longer prime minister.

“I have issues with Keir Starmer as prime minister,” he says. “I think he had the trust of the public, but I would say that’s been broken over and over again. If we had a different Labour prime minister that would be a different conversation about where their values are.

He adds: “I do think stopping Nigel Farage has to be a huge mission for any progressive in this country, but the biggest way we can stop Nigel Farage is by people joining the Green Party right now; creating a real alternative to this Labour government, where we say we don’t have to compromise on our values.

“If people wanted to vote for Nigel Farage, they’d vote for Nigel Farage. What does Keir Starmer think he’s doing by offering politics that are similar but watered down? That’s not going to appeal to anyone, and I think that’s why they’re sinking in the polls.”

The new US sanctions are no slap on the wrist – they’re a punch to the gut of Moscow’s war economy.

Oil giants Rosneft and Lukoil are the twin engines pumping money through Russia’s military veins.

Washington framed the bold move as a bid to “degrade the Kremlin’s ability to raise revenue for its war machine”.

Oil is Russia’s bloodstream, and the Trump Treasury just cut off the blood flow.

But every blow struck in the ring comes with the risk of self-inflicted pain, and there’s potential for collateral damage.

By squeezing Russia’s oil sector, the president is tightening the global market’s chest – and America’s own pump could feel the pressure.

The White House is gambling that the geopolitical payoff will ultimately outweigh the domestic sting.

“These are tremendous sanctions and I hope they don’t last long,” Mr Trump said.

That mix of swagger and caveat summed up his approach – maximum pressure, but with an eye on prices back home.

Europe rushed to mirror Washington’s stance, adding restrictions on imports and tightening loopholes in shipping.

The EU was clearly signalling that it’s in Trump’s corner, that the Western alliance holds.

‘Wasted journey’

On both sides of the Atlantic, they know that Moscow will seize on any disunity and slip through the cracks.

An Oval Office meeting with the NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte provided the diplomatic stagecraft.

Mr Trump repeated that he’d cancelled a planned summit with Vladimir Putin because he “didn’t want to have a wasted journey”.

Mr Rutte played the part of loyal ally, twice labelling the US president “the only one who can get this done”.

Earlier, Mr Rutte played down my suggestion that his visit indicated Trump’s meeting with Zelensky last Friday had been a disaster.

It wouldn’t be the first time Mr Rutte, who famously referred to Mr Trump as “Daddy”, has poured oil on troubled waters.

But it’s Moscow’s apparent refusal to accept Trump’s terms that has put plans for another summit with Putin on hold.

China’s diplomatic influence with Russia could give it some leverage when Mr Trump meets Xi Jinping for trade talks next week.

The US president’s sanctions are more than punishment – they’re a strategic gamble to corner Putin – but the margin of error is razor thin.

If energy prices surge or allied unity splinters, Mr Trump could find himself on the ropes.

The entire East Wing of the White House will be demolished “within days” – much more bulldozing than initially expected for Donald Trump’s new ballroom construction project.

Two Trump administration officials told Sky News’ US partner NBC that the demolition is a significant expansion of the initial plans announced this summer.

“It won’t interfere with the current building,” Mr Trump had said on 31 July. “It’ll be near it, but not touching it, and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of.”

But a White House official told NBC News the “entirety” of the East Wing would eventually be “modernised and rebuilt”.

“The scope and the size of the ballroom project have always been subject to vary as the process develops,” the official added.

The East Wing was built at the beginning of the last century and was last modified in 1942.

Explainer: How Trump has changed the White House while in power

Construction on the ballroom – which is expected to hold up to 900 people when finished – began this week.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a non-profit agency created by Congress to help preserve historic buildings, warned administration officials in a letter on Tuesday that the planned ballroom “will overwhelm the White House itself”.

“We respectfully urge the administration and the National Park Service (stewards of the White House) to pause demolition until plans for the proposed ballroom go through the legally required public review processes,” Carol Quillen, the trust’s chief executive, said in a statement.

‘Fake news’

The White House called the uproar “manufactured outrage” by “unhinged leftists and their fake news allies” in a statement.

Last week, Mr Trump said the total price would be about $250m (£187m), which would be paid for by himself and private donors will pay for. However, on Wednesday, he said the ballroom’s price is “about $300m (£225m)”.

The 90,000 sq ft ballroom will dwarf the White House itself – and would be able to accommodate almost five times more guests than the East Room, the largest current space in the mansion.

Mr Trump says the ballroom won’t cost US taxpayers at all. Instead, “donors” would pay for it.

Comcast, the parent company of Sky News, was included on a list of top donors released last week – but it is unclear how much it or others have contributed.