Ciar_s

You're clearly right on the state's edges — immigration, constitution, deportations of foreign offenders, scepping the ECHR-adjacent extremism-ban question — but you go unusually left the moment the subject is housing, backing rent controls and joint spatial strategies without hesitation. That's not confusion, it's a coherent worldview: a firm, orderly nation on security and identity, married to a genuine belief that the market has failed people your age on where they live.

You mostly move with the country — you sided with the national majority on 24 of your 30 votes, from nuclear defence to marriage equality to keeping the NHS. But where you break, you break hard right of the mainstream: you backed the Burka ban and Shabir Ahmed's deportation well ahead of where the country landed, and you rejected refugee family reunion when most who voted on it agreed with you anyway — this one you're simply more certain on.

Your area is practically your echo chamber — Bromley and Biggin Hill went with you on almost every vote here, including the unanimous swing against Scottish independence and PR reform. The one place you split from your own patch is telling: you backed devolution and joint housing strategy where your neighbours, on thin samples, sat it out or leaned away.

You've never voted on welfare, the economy, or employment — odd gaps for someone this decided on housing costs and student loans. Given how sharply you already think about who pays and who's housed, that's the next frontier worth casting a vote on.

This is an early but sharp shape — 22 scored votes already show real conviction, not drift. Vote on welfare and the economy next and we'll see whether your housing-left instinct is really about fairness across the board, or borders alone.