Ian

Your politics is less about grand ideology than making the state fairer and more useful: stronger rights, closer democratic power, better transport and serious support for children and communities. You are also comfortable with rules and restraint where they seem practical, which gives your left-leaning record a grounded, governing quality.

Since The Housing Ballot Radical, you read less like a campaigner for one defining cause and more like a broad centre-left institutionalist. Rights crossed from Left into Centre Left, Justice crossed from Centre Right into Centre, and your latest votes placed you firmly against replacing human-rights treaties, reducing immigration or abandoning the EU.

You are a genuine cross-grain voter: the UK majority beat you on immigration, Brexit and treaty questions, though you joined it on several welfare, justice and public-service votes. Your support for HS2 and SEND spending captures the distinctive instinct beneath the record — national investment should visibly improve everyday life beyond the capital.

This read finally has your full record behind it; 17 more votes will show whether your practical centre-leftism develops a clearer view of welfare and justice, or keeps balancing provision with limits. Each vote makes the portrait truer, and the next one may reveal which side of that balance is really yours.

You are a centre-left egalitarian whose clearest instinct is to widen security from the ground up: affordable homes, decent work and a democracy with more power in ordinary hands. You defend pluralism and individual rights against the grain of public opinion, yet your centre-right instincts on welfare and justice keep this from being a soft-focus social democracy.

You have moved from The Ballot-Box Social Democrat to a sharper democratic radical: the commitment to housing, employment and reform is intact, but your recent votes make the dissent more visible. Justice has softened from right to centre-right and welfare has edged left, while constitution has moved further left; the old question of whether equality needs order is still open, not settled.

You are almost perfectly willing to stand apart from the national mood: you rejected religious privilege, identity-based suspicion and non-crime hate penalties even when the UK majority backed them. You do not simply oppose the country, though; on tougher university standards, limits on taxation and Palestine Action, you have joined the majority or the right.

Your next ten votes will show whether the newer welfare softness becomes part of your settled egalitarianism, or whether responsibility reasserts itself. The picture is already unusually distinctive, and every vote will sharpen it into a truer read.

You are a centre-left voter with a practical egalitarian streak: housing, decent work and electoral reform matter more to you than ideological tribalism. You want the state to open doors and redistribute power, while still expecting responsibility, order and consequences.

You have moved from The Democratic Leveller to a sharper-edged social democrat: still firmly on the side of rights, constitutional reform and public provision, but more willing to restrict benefits, toughen immigration rules and make offenders pay. Your support for replacing devolution with a federal constitution sits strikingly beside that harder line.

You are almost perfectly cross-grained with the country, siding with the UK majority on 35 of 60 recent votes. You join the nation on tougher welfare and immigration measures, but break away on transgender rights, foreign nationals’ benefits and the monarchy—an independent centre-left instinct rather than a simple oppositional one.

Your record is already substantial, but the live question is whether the recent welfare-and-justice turn settles into conviction or gives way to your older levelling impulse. Ten more votes will earn a fresh read, and each one will sharpen the picture of the country you are trying to build.

You want a more democratic, more publicly minded UK: power dispersed, housing treated as a right, and constitutional rules made explicit rather than left to Westminster’s habits. Your leftism is strongest where people are locked out — from homes, representation and equal rights — yet you are no soft-touch egalitarian: you favour community work for able prisoners, mandatory whole-life orders for police murder, and a firm line on public safety.

A while back, you were The Constitutional Leveller; you have not abandoned that instinct, but you have become a more exacting one. Welfare has moved towards the centre, immigration and justice have edged right, while your constitutional reform has sharpened left — a democratic reformer increasingly willing to use the stick as well as the ballot.

You are neither a habitual dissenter nor a reliable follower: across recent votes, you have split almost evenly from the national mood. You broke sharply with the country on gender identity, halal labelling, randomised Lords reform and restoring foreign aid, while occasionally joining its tougher instincts on religious slaughter, prisoners’ obligations and welfare spending.

Your circle sits around the centre, but you are barely in lockstep with it, agreeing on fewer than half of shared votes. You follow a crowd you often challenge: your independence matters more than ideological belonging, especially when democratic reform or economic power is at stake.

Your next ten votes will test whether the constitutional leveller becomes a democratic disciplinarian — and every vote will sharpen the picture further, until the full arc is unmistakable.

You are a clearly left voter whose deepest instinct is constitutional rather than tribal: make power answerable, widen representation and put housing, water and public provision ahead of private extraction. You are socially liberal on immigration and rights, but not permissive about welfare, justice or every fashionable green solution; your ideal UK is fairer, more decentralised and institutionally harder to abuse.

You have moved from The Carbon-Sceptic Collectivist to The Constitutional Leveller: the economic and environmental independence remains, but democratic architecture now sits more visibly at the centre. Supporting a written constitution, proportional representation, Scottish consent and a reduced monarchy makes this less a climate argument than a campaign to redistribute power itself.

You are neither a reliable majoritarian nor an automatic dissenter: the nation has been as likely to agree with you as disagree. Your sharpest breaks with the public run towards press regulation, Scottish self-determination and public ownership, while your refusal to hang child murderers and your rejection of an immediate election reveal a left voter who still values restraint over emotional punishment or political theatre.

Your circle averages Centre, but you agree with it only about half the time, so you are not simply running with your feed. You share its suspicion of slogans and institutional failure, yet your commitment to constitutional reform, housing and public control makes you more structurally left-wing than the crowd you follow.

The open question is whether your welfare-and-justice toughness can live comfortably alongside your expansive democratic vision. Ten more votes will earn a fresh read, and each one will sharpen the picture of the country you are trying to build.

You are a clearly centre-left voter whose instinct is to treat housing, land and the economy as public responsibilities, not private weather systems. Yet your leftism is not automatically progressive: you resist net-zero mandates and lean right on energy, while defending migrants, civil liberties and a plural society.

You have moved from The Housing Social Democrat to the Carbon-Sceptic Collectivist: the housing conviction remains, but your economic interventionism is now paired with a sharper refusal to follow the green consensus. The recent record strengthens your rights-first politics — rejecting withdrawal from the ECHR, firearms and border militarisation — while keeping a welfare brake and energy scepticism in reserve.

You are roughly as likely to oppose the UK majority as join it, which makes you less a tribal left voter than a principled dissenter. You side with the nation on Scotland’s place in the UK and NHS progress, but stand against its appetite for migration caps, cultural defensiveness and tougher border politics.

Your circle averages Centre, and you agree with it only slightly more than half the time: you follow the crowd without surrendering your own wiring. Compared with them, your strongest signature is an unusually interventionist economic and housing outlook, checked by a harder line on energy and selected welfare questions.

Your open question is whether the green agenda can win your economic trust without demanding ideological obedience. Ten more votes will sharpen that fault line — and make the picture of the country you want truer still.

Your politics begin with the state as an instrument of fairness: council-house building, rent controls, bank taxation, equal pay and a less punitive welfare settlement. You are unusually constitutional for the left—pro-devolution, recall and citizen power—yet your rightward instincts surface around energy, prison discipline and some immigration enforcement: the social democrat with a rulebook.

You have not left The Constitutional Social Democrat so much as sharpened it into The Housing Social Democrat: the same public-minded, democratic core, now with housing and economic intervention as your clearest test of whether government is working. Recent votes confirm the tension rather than resolve it—protecting people from AI replicas and rejecting an ICE force, but opposing a faster zero-emission mandate and backing foreign prisoners serving sentences abroad.

You are neither a habitual contrarian nor a follower of the national mood: your record splits fairly evenly from the UK majority. You are more expansive than the country on public provision and constitutional reform, but tougher than your own economic instincts when order, borders or energy security enter the room.

You run only slightly with your Centre-average circle, agreeing on just over half of shared votes: affiliation without lockstep. Your independent streak matters more than the crowd’s label—you are likely to meet them on social-democratic economics, then part ways over enforcement and the pace of decarbonisation.

Your open question is whether the housing-and-state-builder in you can reconcile with the energy realist and enforcement-minded voter. Ten more votes will sharpen that balance—and make the picture truer, not merely newer.

You are a constitutional social democrat: expansive on rights, public housing and tax reform, with a strong belief that the state should correct markets rather than simply manage their failures. You want a more equal UK built around secure homes, stronger democratic rules and a serious public realm—but you are not instinctively permissive, especially on welfare enforcement, migration and climate policy.

You have moved from The Green Constitutional Dissenter to a more grounded Constitutional Social Democrat: still firmly committed to rights, housing and an active state, but sharper about who qualifies for support and more willing to distrust green remedies. The recent votes have not overturned your worldview; they have made its boundaries clearer.

You are neither a loyal majority voter nor a reflexive contrarian, landing about as often against the UK’s prevailing instinct as with it. You side with the country on action against self-supporting migrants and tougher justice, but part company when majority opinion turns towards migration panic, religious schooling or treating net migration as the master explanation for broken services.

Your circle sits around the centre, and you agree with it only slightly more than half the time: you run alongside your crowd, but never in lockstep. The telling gap is that your left economics and constitutionalism pull you away from centrist caution, while your harder line on enforcement and energy pulls you back.

Your open question is whether your instinct for a bigger, fairer state can coexist with your growing demand for discipline and proof. Ten more votes will sharpen that fault line—and make this picture truer as your record grows.

You are a firmly centre-left voter with a surprisingly practical streak: you want the UK to protect rights, build council homes and confront climate change, but you are not instinctively anti-authority or anti-security. Your sharpest contradiction is energy: despite your green convictions, you repeatedly accept a more right-leaning, tougher approach there.

You were The Green Constitutional Pragmatist; you have held that core, but sharpened it into a more interventionist builder of the country you want. The new votes make the edge clearer: council housing, HS2 and regional devolution are not abstractions to you, while increased defence spending and migration-led explanations of social crises remain firmly outside your politics.

You sit around the national middle overall, siding with the UK on roughly as many questions as you resist. But your strongest beliefs often run against the grain: you backed devolved government, diversity, public housing and support for Ukraine while rejecting the nation’s more defensive mood on defence, migration and social breakdown.

Your circle averages centre, and you agree with it just over half the time: you are connected to the mainstream without being absorbed by it. You follow the conversation, then break away where rights, housing and constitutional reform matter most.

The open question is whether your green politics can coexist with your energy realism as the choices become more expensive and concrete. Ten more votes will unlock a fresher read—and each one will make the picture of your chosen UK harder to mistake.

You are a Centre-Left voter whose ideal UK is greener, more devolved and more constitutionally protected: regulate rents, defend rights, spread power beyond Westminster and make housing attainable. But you are not instinctively anti-state; your rightward turns on energy, education and parts of justice reveal a practical streak that prefers workable rules to left orthodoxy.

You have moved from The Green Constitutional Enforcer to a more democratic, less disciplinary version of the same worldview: still green and rights-first, but now more interested in recall, citizen questions and rent controls than in simply making rules bite. Your recent refusal of small-boat militarisation, the death penalty and Reform’s programme sharpened the liberal edge, while support for an independent nuclear deterrent kept the hard-headed realism.

You often stand apart from the national mood, especially when the majority reaches for punishment, debt anxiety or cultural grievance; the country went heavily the other way on several of your recent votes. Yet you are not a reflexive contrarian: you joined the UK majority on university reform, ministerial disclosure and nuclear defence, and your energy and education instincts can land on the right.

You run almost exactly alongside a Centre-leaning circle, agreeing with it a little over half the time—but not in lockstep. Your loyalty is to your own blend of green constitutionalism, not to a tribe: closer on rights and devolution, more independent where energy security or educational discipline enters the frame.

Your open question is whether practical restraint can coexist with your expansive democratic and environmental ambitions; ten more votes will show which side wins. The picture will sharpen with every ballot, and your next ten votes unlock a fresh read.

You are a centre-left state-builder who wants power pushed outward, rights written down and wealth used to repair society and the environment. But your idealism has a hard edge: you support fossil-fuel taxes and climate action while still demanding energy security, benefit discipline and tougher justice.

You were The Collectivist Disciplinarian; you have become a more constitutional, environmentally driven version of the same governing instinct. The recent record sharpens rather than overturns you: you still reject deficit absolutism and exclusive citizenship, but now pair that openness with support for welfare restraint and transparent benefit checks.

You are neither a standardiser nor a follower of the national mood: across the recent record, you have sided with the UK majority about as often as you have resisted it. Your clearest break with the country is constitutional and economic — you distrust balanced-budget dogma and prefer a codified rights settlement, even when the popular vote points the other way.

Your circle is centred, and you sit only slightly apart from it: agreement is real but never automatic. You run with your followers on practical reform, yet your leftward convictions on taxation, devolution and rights — alongside your rightward instincts on justice and energy — make you harder to place than the crowd itself.

The open question is whether your greener, more rights-based politics can finally reconcile itself with your instinct for order and restraint. Ten more votes will sharpen that fault line and make the picture truer still.

You are a centre-left state-builder: more public power, stronger economic redistribution and a constitutional reset, from replacing the Lords to moving authority out of Westminster. But this is no soft collectivism—you want tighter migration, tougher criminal justice and continued fossil-fuel pragmatism, a “social contract with consequences.”

You were The Statist Driller; now you are the Collectivist Disciplinarian. The drilling exception has held firm, but Justice has matured into a second right-leaning bloc: permanent bans for serious offenders, harder welfare conditions and a clear refusal to treat punishment as a social taboo.

You are neither reliably with nor against the national mood: you meet the country on migration, housing and regional power, but break sharply from it on rearmament, Union symbolism and preserving rights institutions. Your most revealing split is that you can favour a larger, more interventionist state while resisting repayment of Winter Fuel support from higher earners.

You run only loosely with your Centre-leaning circle, agreeing just over half the time rather than taking its cues wholesale. garrilla is your closest ally; AlfieNUFC is the sharpest clash, especially on the economy and constitution—the very foundations on which your politics are most immovable.

Your next ten votes will test whether Justice becomes a permanent pillar beside your collectivism, or remains an exception to it; the picture only gets truer each time you cast one.

You want a UK run on collectivist lines — a rebuilt House of Lords, a National Care Service, trade unions with real teeth, capital gains taxed like income — but you don't extend that instinct to energy or punishment: you'd scrap the triple lock, open the North Sea, keep prisoner-pays schemes and back Andy Burnham's early-release crackdown. It's a state that owns the big structures and still expects people to graft and pay their way.

Last time you were "The Collectivist Driller" — an open thread asking whether the energy-right streak would harden or fade. It's hardened: Rosebank, Jackdaw, North Sea drilling, even the badger cull all went your way this round, alongside a newly visible right turn on Justice (prisoner costs, benefit conditionality, drug decriminalisation refused). The left convictions on Constitution and Economy haven't budged an inch.

You're a genuine swing voter against the crowd almost as often as with it, splitting roughly down the middle on 60 recent votes — you refused the nation's enthusiasm for university-place cuts, gunboats in the Channel and rearmament, but joined its majority on drilling and prisoner reform.

You run closer to garrilla than anyone else you follow, in step four times out of five — but AlfieNUFC is your real foil, and tellingly you clash there precisely on Economy and Constitution, your two strongest convictions.

This is a live read — every vote you cast narrows the picture further, and the real test now is whether Justice keeps drifting rightward alongside Energy, or whether it was this week's outlier. Next week's profile will tell you which.

You want a state that owns and protects — a National Care Service funded by general taxation, utilities pried from private pensions, a trillion in one man's hands called obscene. But you break hard on energy: yes to Rosebank, yes to fracking, yes to nuclear. This isn't incoherence — it's a vision of a muscular, self-sufficient state that taxes wealth and drills its own ground rather than depending on anyone else's.

You're not a reflex rebel — you side with the national majority about as often as against it. But where you diverge, it's pointed: you'd end the BBC licence fee's survival, back Scottish independence when eight in ten voters didn't, and refuse to ban the burka when the country split down the middle. Your "no" to marriage equality strengthening society, against 82% of the country, is the profile's real fault line.

You run closer to garrilla than anyone else you follow — lockstep four times in five. Raynewton is the opposite story: you agree barely a third of the time, wrenched apart on rights and how power should be devolved, even while your instincts on welfare might overlap.

Twenty-one scored votes have already drawn a sharp, contradictory picture — state-owner and driller in one. Keep voting and the next read will tell you whether that's a genuine worldview or a fault line waiting to crack.