Debtats

You vote for a leaner, harder-edged state: welfare tightened, governance tightened, the economy run on discipline rather than generosity — unanimous or near-unanimous across all three, your three hardest convictions. This is a Britain that pays its way, guards its borders and institutions, and doesn't apologise for saying no.

Last read you were "The Sovereign Hardliner" — welfare and the union. You've since filled in defence, constitution and foreign policy with the same unbending right-wing certainty, turning a narrow conviction into a full worldview. The old tension survives intact, though: you still break left the moment a vote is about the state watching itself, not its citizens.

On welfare, economy and governance you're well to the right of the national mood — where the country splits or leans left, you don't hesitate. Immigration is your one genuine blind spot, sitting neutral against an otherwise unanimous record, worth watching as more votes land.

You run with a Centre-Right crowd but don't just follow it — 63% agreement overall, rising to 80% with Jameslikestea, your clearest ally. TomLinnane is another matter: barely coin-flip odds across 32 shared votes, the split concentrated exactly where you break from yourself — rights and defence.

Every vote you cast sharpens this picture — especially the untested ground of health, business and education, where a record this decided elsewhere leaves real questions open. Next week's read will know you better than this one does.

You want a leaner, harder Britain — one that pays less into welfare and foreign aid, spends more on NATO, and answers to no devolved assembly or proportional parliament. Your convictions on welfare, constitution and defence aren't just right-leaning, they're unanimous — a settled worldview, not a set of hunches.

Last week you were "The Welfare Disciplinarian," strict but narrow. This week the same discipline has spread outward — into the constitution (no to Scottish independence, no to English independence, no to PR) and defence (yes to 3.5% GDP even at the cost of other spending) — you've hardened from a benefits hawk into someone with a settled theory of the state itself.

You split almost evenly with the national mood — agreeing on about two in three votes — but where you diverge, it's pointed: Britain wanted the aid target restored, wanted the JCPOA kept, wanted marriage equality celebrated; you said no to all three. Tellingly, you also broke RIGHT of your own instincts when you backed facial-recognition safeguards and a Hillsborough Law — proof your hardline has limits where state power over the citizen is concerned.

Selly Oak backs you almost without exception — nearly every local vote you've logged matches the area's lone recorded voice, a rare, near-total alignment that makes you less an outlier there than a spokesperson.

You've never cast a vote on health, immigration, business or education — startling gaps for someone this decided everywhere else, and the next place your hard-right instincts will really be tested.

This profile sharpens every time you vote — cast a few in health or immigration and we'll see whether the disciplinarian holds or bends again.

You want a leaner state that stops paying out before it asks why: tighten PIP assessments, strip mild ADHD from disability claims, no national care service funded by general taxation. Pair that with no to rent controls, no to a wealth tax, yes to nuclear defence and dropping net zero, and the shape is unmistakable — a smaller, harder Britain that expects people to stand on their own, and spends what's left on the hard stuff like defence.

You're not a reflexive contrarian — you sided with the national majority on around two in three of your votes — but where you break, you break decisively: the country voted 63% yes for a National Care Service and you were a flat no, and Britain wanted regional devolution by two-to-one while you shut the door.

Selly Oak backs you almost to a man on every scored vote here — care service, rent controls, devolution, PIP, ADHD benefits, net zero — your area returns unanimous or near-unanimous agreement, a rare thing this consistent. The one wrinkle: you broke right on spatial development strategies while voting yes to the national growth-framework version, a small crack in an otherwise locked-step record with your neighbours.

You've never voted on immigration, health, justice or education — odd gaps for someone this decided on welfare and housing, and exactly where your instincts would likely sharpen the picture further.

Thirteen scored votes already tell a clear story — cast a few more in those gaps and we'll know not just that you lean right, but exactly which Britain you're building. This profile updates every week you vote; come back and see it get truer.