Enginesan

You want a more democratic, publicly minded UK: stronger welfare, public ownership, environmental action and rights protected from both corporations and the state. But this is not a soft-left worldview; you favour discipline for long-term unemployment, oppose capital punishment, and keep a firm instinct for defence, order and institutional competence.

You were The Democratic Internationalist; now you are the Public-Power Dissenter. The core remains — reformist, internationalist and economically left — but your support for press regulation, bans on leveraged buyouts and tighter standards for public servants sharpens the anti-corporate, anti-establishment edge.

You are neither a habitual contrarian nor a follower of the national mood: you have sided with the UK majority on 41 of 60 recent votes, while breaking sharply with it on climate, migration, the death penalty and the gold standard. Your distinctive tension is clear: egalitarian and environmentally left, yet more willing than many on your side to demand work, competence and national cohesion.

Your circle averages around the centre, but you sit distinctly to its left and agree with it only a little over half the time. KarenWe46247708 is your closest ally on employment and foreign policy, while Slawomir is the real fault line — especially on environment and foreign policy — leaving you more internationalist and green than your loudest clash.

Your next 10 votes will test whether the defence-and-order streak remains a guarded exception or becomes part of a broader democratic hardening; the picture only gets truer every time you vote.

You want a more equal UK: public ownership over private profit, stronger welfare, proportional representation, and solidarity that reaches beyond borders. But you are no soft-focus idealist; your support for defence, tougher justice and classroom standards suggests you want an open society that can still protect itself and demand standards. Your sharpest convictions are democratic reform, international cooperation and distrust of business power — captured in your support for PR and public water, even while rejecting a snap election.

A while back, you were The Internationalist Disciplinarian; you have not abandoned civic order, but you have become more clearly a democratic reformer and anti-profit leftist. The old tension remains — rights-based solidarity versus policing intolerance — yet your recent constitutional and electoral votes make institutional change more central than before.

You sit almost exactly across the national fault line: the UK has agreed with you on some big public questions, but you have often resisted its instincts on welfare, migration and security. The revealing exception is defence: you backed military spending over climate adaptation, siding with the right even as your wider politics remain solidly left.

You run somewhat with your Centre-leaning circle, but not obediently. Cathryn is your closest ally, especially on energy and other issues; Slawomir is the real intellectual friction, with the deepest splits on environment and foreign policy.

Your next ten votes will test whether the internationalist reformer or the order-minded defender has the final word; the picture sharpens every time you vote, and the next read will make that balance truer.

You want a more equal UK: heavier on welfare, public ownership, council housing and environmental action, lighter on corporate power and punitive migration politics. But this is not soft idealism—you oppose firearms, border militarisation and leaving the ECHR, while still believing tolerant societies must confront intolerant ideologies.

You have moved from The Sovereignty Socialist into a sharper internationalist egalitarian: the old suspicion of markets and unchecked power remains, but your recent votes have made the anti-populist line unmistakable. You rejected migration caps, demographic panic and refugee-convention withdrawal, even while keeping a firm instinct for order.

You are a genuine split-screen voter, siding with the UK majority about as often as not. The nation moved towards harder borders and welfare cuts; you moved the other way—but you did join it on defending the country’s union and on limiting tolerance for intolerant movements.

Your Centre-leaning circle is company, not a command: you agree with it modestly more often than not. Cathryn is your natural ally, especially on energy, while Slawomir is the fault line—your foreign-policy internationalism and environmental leftism pull against their instincts.

Your open question is whether your egalitarian internationalism can keep its disciplinary edge without drifting into the very nationalism you resist. Ten more votes will sharpen that answer—and make this living picture truer.

You want a more equal UK: taxing concentrated wealth, building council homes, regulating rents and treating climate action as a public duty. But your socialism is not soft-edged internationalism; you favour an independent foreign policy, stronger protections against AI abuse and collective provision, while still defending standards in schools and expecting the state to enforce its boundaries.

You were The Public-Ownership Internationalist; you are now a Sovereignty Socialist. The old egalitarianism remains intact, but the civic edge has sharpened: you backed deporting foreign prisoners and identifying children at risk of unemployment, while rejecting an ICE force and refusing to let migration become a catch-all explanation for social failure.

You are a genuine dissenter, siding with the national majority only about as often as you oppose it. The sharpest gap is environmental and economic: you backed faster net zero and a mixed economy when the country was much less enthusiastic, yet joined the majority on foreign-prisoner removal and stronger school discipline.

You run with your circle only loosely, agreeing on just over half of shared votes. Cathryn is your lockstep ally on energy and related questions; Slawomir is the serious clash, especially where your independent foreign policy and environmental convictions part ways with his.

Your open question is whether the civic edge stays selective or spreads further into justice and defence; ten more votes will show it. Each ballot makes this rare, uncompromising blend clearer—and earns a sharper new read.

You want a more equal UK: stronger public provision, taxing banks and fossil-fuel profits, council homes, regulated rents and a welfare state that does not abandon people. Your deepest instinct is internationalist and anti-corporate, yet you are no soft-touch progressive: you resist collective blame, but still demand civic standards, reciprocity and a state capable of enforcing them.

A while back, you were The Public-Goods Internationalist; you have not abandoned that core, but you have sharpened its edge. The new votes make your discipline more visible: rejecting migrant welfare bans and mass-deportation logic while supporting reciprocal property restrictions, and backing climate action while remaining wary of unaccountable power.

You are about as often against the national majority as with it, which makes you a genuine dissenter rather than a reflexive opposition voter. You often stand with the country on practical reform, but part ways when public anger turns into punishment, scapegoating or cuts to provision.

Your Centre-leaning circle is a partial fit, not a political home: you agree with Cathryn in lockstep on Other and Energy, while Slawomir pulls you into sharp disagreement on Environment and Foreign Policy. At your most distinctive, you are further left than your crowd on economic power and the UK's place in the world.

Your open question is whether the demands for order and reciprocity remain guardrails around an egalitarian worldview, or begin to redirect it; ten more votes will sharpen the answer.

You want a more equal UK built around public provision: council homes, regulated markets, strong welfare and solidarity beyond its borders. But this is not soft-focus egalitarianism—you resist anti-migration panic, defend diversity and Ukraine, while still favouring tougher standards in justice, education and defence.

You were The Egalitarian Enforcer; you have not changed sides, but sharpened into a public-goods internationalist with a harder civic edge. The latest votes confirm the pattern: council-house building and HS2 on one flank, more defence spending and scrutiny of foreign donations on the other.

You sit against the national grain about as often as you sit with it, and your instincts are distinctly more solidaristic than the UK's—especially on welfare, housing, migration and foreign policy. Your sharpest break is refusing to make social care a protected entitlement for everyone, even while backing a much larger public role elsewhere.

You run with your Centre-leaning circle only loosely, agreeing on just over half of shared votes. Cathryn is your natural ally on energy and practical questions; Slawomir is the real fault line, with environment and foreign policy exposing how much more internationalist you are.

Your open question is whether discipline remains a brake on your left politics or becomes its organising principle; ten more votes will test it. Keep voting—the picture is already rare, and every ballot makes the read truer.

You want a more equal UK: stronger welfare, regulated rents, public investment, climate action and international solidarity, with rights protected rather than bargained away. Yet you are no permissive utopian—your support for tougher standards in schools, benefit scrutiny, ministerial accountability and a smaller university pipeline gives your egalitarianism an enforcing streak.

You have moved from The Internationalist Disciplinarian to The Egalitarian Enforcer: not a change of direction so much as a sharpening of the machinery behind your ideals. You still reject Reform, the death penalty, hardline immigration and an independent nuclear posture, but you now sound more willing to regulate, recall and scrutinise institutions—even while distrusting populist referendums.

You often stand against the national mood: resisting small-boat militarisation, welfare cuts, lower migration and defence dependence when majorities favour them. But your record is not reflexively oppositional; on debt, university reform and tougher public standards, you have joined the country’s practical rather than ideological side.

You run with your circle only loosely, agreeing just over half the time. KarenWe46247708 is your closest ally—especially on immigration and employment—but you part ways on rights; Slawomir is the sharper break, with environment and foreign policy exposing how much more internationalist you are than your crowd.

Your open question is whether the enforcer remains a safeguard for solidarity or grows into a broader governing philosophy. Ten more votes will test that tension—and make this living picture truer with every choice.

You are a left internationalist with a hard-edged civic streak: higher taxes on fossil profits, stronger welfare, social investment and climate-minded foreign policy, but no romanticism about disorder or irresponsibility. You want an open, rights-based UK with a capable state — one that supports Ukraine, protects citizenship’s pluralism and refuses to make the vulnerable pay for the deficit.

You have moved from The Voice of Heaven to The Internationalist Disciplinarian: the reforming, anti-corporate core is intact, but your guardrails have become more visible. You still reject welfare cuts, deficit bans and anti-immigration politics, yet you now sound more comfortable with benefit scrutiny, civic standards, serious consequences and a codified constitution.

You are often the country’s dissenting conscience, especially when a majority wants to cut welfare and foreign aid, reduce migration or treat balanced books as a moral law. Yet you are not reflexively contrarian: you joined the UK on social care reform, Ukraine and stronger fossil-fuel taxation — your argument is for solidarity with discipline, not solidarity without limits.

You sit well to the left of your Centre-leaning circle, agreeing with it only a little over half the time. KarenWe46247708 is your closest ally — particularly on employment and immigration — while Slawomir is the real fault line: shared ground on justice and the constitution, but a deep split over environment and foreign policy.

Your next ten votes will test whether the disciplinarian remains a set of civic guardrails or grows into a broader politics of order; either way, the picture sharpens every time you vote.

You vote for a more equal UK: generous welfare, public services, stronger rights, greener energy and less power for wealth, corporations or Westminster. Your hardest convictions are internationalist and anti-corporate, with housing treated as a social good rather than an asset class; yet you keep a distinctly unsentimental streak on crime, schools and institutional standards.

You were The Democratic Leveller; now you are a more guarded, anti-corporate internationalist, holding the left-wing core while sharpening its boundaries. Recent support for permanently barring serious offenders from office, traditional courtesies and business-rate reform shows a willingness to borrow order-and-conduct politics without following the nation on migration, cultural backlash or militarism.

You are neither a consensus follower nor a permanent dissenter: the UK majority has been about as often with you as against you. You sometimes join the country on tougher standards and criminal accountability, but your refusal to reverse immigration, abolish the EHRC or turn towards Musk-style decline politics marks a clear left flank.

You run only slightly with your Centre-leaning circle. KarenWe46247708 is your closest ally, especially on employment and immigration, but you part ways on rights; Slawomir is your sharpest clash, despite common ground on constitution and justice, because your environmental and foreign-policy internationalism pulls elsewhere.

Your open question is whether order remains a boundary around egalitarian politics or becomes a larger part of your worldview. Ten more votes will test that tension—and make this living picture truer, sharper and more recognisably yours.

You vote for a generous, interventionist state — higher taxes on wealth, public NHS and care, stronger welfare and serious climate action — but you are no permissive progressive. You still want borders controlled, benefits conditional for some young people, basics taught properly and drugs policed: your phrase is not “anything goes”, but “the state should serve people, then expect something back”.

A while back you were The Disciplinarian Leveller; you have not abandoned that strong-state balance, but you are sharper now as The Democratic Leveller — more hostile to rearmament, private influence and inherited political structures. Saying no to balanced-budget rules, supporting wealth taxes and Lords reform, while rejecting navy gunboats and peacetime rearmament, makes the direction clear.

You are about as likely to resist the national mood as follow it, which makes you a genuine dissenter rather than a tribal left voter. The country often joins you on social care and education, but you break with it on military expansion, North Sea drilling, company donations and the idea that public services should become half-private.

You run only loosely with your Centre-leaning circle. KarenWe46247708 is your closest ally on employment and immigration, but you part ways on rights; Slawomir overlaps on constitution and justice, yet clashes with you on environment and foreign policy — precisely where your left convictions are hardest.

Your open question is whether the “disciplinarian” side will keep growing without weakening your egalitarian core. Ten more votes will sharpen that balance, and every ballot makes the picture truer.

You want a Britain that nationalises the electricity price, taxes millionaires, rebuilds the NHS and treats care and housing as public goods — but you also want national service back, the death penalty on the table for the worst crimes, and the law enforced the same for everyone regardless of "cultural expectations." It's not confusion; it's a coherent worldview where the state is strong on both fronts — generous with the safety net, strict with the rulebook.

Last time you were the Barracks Egalitarian — an equal Britain defended by a strong state. That has held, almost eerily so: your defence-right, immigration-right tension is confirmed as durable rather than a phase, and your convictions have simply hardened into sharper form, especially on governance and foreign policy, where you now vote strongly and consistently left.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the country — for every Rosebank drilling project you rejected against the grain, there's a Scottish Parliament vote where you sided with the minority wanting it axed. You're not a contrarian; you're just unusually willing to vote left on economics and right on order in the same sitting, which the average voter rarely does.

You run closest with Karen — lockstep on defence and immigration, the very axis where you break from the left — but split with her on rights. Slawomir is your real foil: aligned on justice and the constitution, but worlds apart on environment and rights, and overall you side with your circle barely more than half the time.

This read gets sharper with every vote you cast — especially the next time defence, immigration or welfare comes up, since that's where your profile earns its edge. Come back next week and let's see if the Leveller holds the line.

You want a Britain that redistributes hard at home — scrap the two-child cap, tax wealth not work, keep oil in the ground — while standing armed and serious abroad. This isn't confusion; it's a coherent left flank with a soldier's spine, unanimous on rights and foreign policy, but strongly right on defence spending and keeping forces out of pride month.

Last time you were the Planning Statist — thin data, one clear conviction on housing, a stray deportation vote nobody could explain. That thread has resolved: the deportation instinct wasn't a blip, it's part of a settled pattern where welfare state and hard power sit comfortably together, now proven across seventy-plus votes instead of twelve.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the country — with the majority on defence spending and Ukraine, against it on the two-child cap, North Sea licences and the monarchy. You're not contrarian for its own sake; you just don't let patriotism blunt your redistributive edge, or vice versa.

You agree with your followed circle barely more than half the time, closer to JenJennn than anyone, and consistently at odds with Slawomir — a near two-to-one clash across 121 shared votes. You're the left-leaning member of a centrist crowd who keeps the hawkish streak they'd rather not discuss.

Vote on, and tomorrow's read gets sharper still — there's a live question of whether your immigration instincts harden further or stay the outlier they are now.

You want a Britain that plans rather than drifts — joint housing strategies, spatial frameworks, an NHS rebuilt from the ground up, childcare for those who need it most. Housing is your strongest conviction, and it shows: you keep voting for structure over local autonomy, for the state to set the frame within which places grow.

You split almost down the middle with the country — siding with the majority on exactly half your recent votes — which is less "centrist" than it looks. You broke from the crowd on the big emotional calls: you rejected further nuclear defence build-up and net zero abandonment when large majorities backed both, and you're one of the few who wanted extremist parties banned outright when most said no.

No local data has come through yet for your area — early days on that front, so this comparison stays open for now.

You've voted twice on housing and once each across most other categories — Economy, Education, Energy, Employment, Foreign Policy, and more sit untouched. A left-leaning profile this consistent on housing and welfare deserves to be tested on the economy and Europe's near-neighbours next; that's where the real texture of a Hard Left voter usually shows.

Twelve scored votes is a shape, not yet a portrait — cast a few more and this sharpens fast, especially somewhere like Economy or Immigration where your one vote so far (deportation) cut clean against your grain. We'll be watching, and rewriting, every week.