Abyssal_Lord

Housing, governance, economy — unanimous, hard-right, no wobble. You want a leaner state that builds infrastructure it actually controls (nuclear, not solar mandates), punishes crime without sentiment, and strips out devolved layers like the GLA rather than adding new regional assemblies.

"The Skeptical Realist" was a two-vote hunch; now, with 34 scored votes, the hypothesis has hardened into conviction. You're no longer just distrustful of government — you're specifically anti-green-mandate, pro-nuclear, anti-devolution, and increasingly comfortable arguing your case in public, not just voting quietly.

You split almost evenly with the national mood — siding with the majority on barely half these votes — but the misses are pointed: Britain wanted heat pump incentives, council housing investment, and devolution; you wanted none of it. When the nation votes green or centralist, you're reliably the holdout.

You run close with TeresaBremner, lockstep on rights and constitution, and further from NickB, where governance and justice pull you apart despite shared instincts on rights. At 77% agreement with a right-leaning circle, you're not a maverick within it — but the Governance/Justice gap with NickB is where your own hardest convictions show their edges.

This read gets sharper with every vote — welfare and immigration are still thin, and that's exactly where the "small-state realist" story either firms up or cracks. Vote on, and next week's read will know you better than this one does.

You want a leaner state that does fewer things well — no state housebuilder, no UBI, no faith that Westminster can fix what it broke. "More government, when they've already proven incompetent" isn't a slogan for you, it's your baseline test for every policy that crosses your path.

You're rarely the outlier — nuclear deterrence, immigration cuts, net zero scepticism, zero tolerance on political violence: on nine of ten votes you sat with the national majority. The one place you broke from it was Starmer's record, where you were firmly in the "no" camp against a country roughly split down the middle.

Croydon South gave you nothing but agreement — on every vote with local data, your area matched you vote for vote, unanimous. It's a strange comfort: you've yet to be tested against your own neighbours.

Ten votes cast, but only two carry a political signal, and entire fault lines — welfare, immigration policy proper, justice, economy — sit untouched. This is a sketch, not a portrait yet; the "Restore" comment and your instinct against LabCon suggest where the fuller picture is heading, but it isn't there yet.

Cast a few more votes on welfare or economy and this stops being a hunch and starts being a record — every vote you add sharpens the line between "usually agrees with Britain" and "has a worldview of his own." Come back next week; you'll be a clearer person by then.