Michael

You want a Britain that's firm at the border and functional at home — deport, restrict, secure, but don't dismantle the NHS or abolish the mayoralty while you're at it. Your right runs through immigration and justice; your left runs through governance and public services. That's not confusion, it's a coherent split most commentators would call "hardline on borders, statist on delivery."

You mostly ride with the herd — siding with the national majority on 14 of your 19 votes — but you break rank where it counts: you voted no on extra funding for police protecting Jewish communities while the country said yes, and no to banning Iran's IRGC while 77% backed it. That's a real divergence, not noise.

No local data yet — your area hasn't weighed in alongside you on these votes, so there's nothing to measure you against locally. That's the honest gap, not a dodge.

You've never voted on welfare, the economy, the constitution or foreign policy — huge chunks of British political life untouched. For someone this decisive on immigration and governance, that's a surprisingly empty half of the map.

Thirteen scored votes is early days — real, but thin. Cast a few more on welfare or the economy and this profile stops being a sketch and starts being a portrait; every vote you make sharpens the next read.