MiriamYagud

You want a UK where security is treated as a right, not a reward for good behaviour: stronger protections, public control of essential services, regulated rents and a welfare state no government can casually dismantle. Your opposition to welfare cuts, migration restriction and sending foreign prisoners abroad is part of one expansive instinct — citizenship should not be reduced to deservingness, punishment or exclusion. Yet you are not a pure collectivist: you reject the idea that the rich are inherently evil, and your lone right-leaning votes on health and education hint at standards and responsibility beneath the solidarity.

You have moved from The Welfare-Rights Firebrand to something broader and more settled: the social guarantee now runs through almost every category, not just welfare and rights. The recent votes sharpened your resistance to national debt being balanced on claimants, migrants or public services, while your anti-university vote leaves an intriguing question about whether your egalitarianism is becoming more sceptical of elite institutions.

You are a genuine counterweight to the national mood, siding with the UK majority only about as often as not. You opposed rent extraction, welfare retrenchment and migration restriction even when the country leaned the other way — but you are not contrarian for sport: on ministers declaring convictions, Westminster alcohol and the NSDAP, you followed the public instinct.

Your Centre-Right circle is more market-minded and restrictive than you are; you agree with it often enough to remain in conversation, but not in political lockstep. Glasses is your closest ally, though even there the relationship splits over economy and housing — precisely where your politics are most fiercely redistributive.

Your next ten votes will test the open seam between social protection and institutional scepticism; keep voting, and this already vivid picture will become sharper still.

You vote for a UK where the state redistributes boldly, protects rights as constitutional commitments and treats public provision as a guarantee, not a last resort. Your defence of the triple lock rests on a simple claim — UK pensioners are “among the poorest in Europe” — and that instinct runs through welfare, housing, energy and taxation.

You have moved from The Public-Service Firebrand to The Welfare-Rights Firebrand: not a reversal, but a sharper and more expansive version of the same politics. The latest votes add codified rights, progressive taxation and social-care reform to your existing commitment to local power, housebuilding and clean energy.

You are neither a routine follower nor a permanent dissenter: you matched the UK majority on 23 of 39 votes, but often broke away on migration, benefit restrictions, the EHRC and the triple lock. The revealing tension is that your egalitarianism is not permissive across the board — you backed permanently barring serious offenders from public office and remain cautious on drugs and health.

Your Centre-Right circle is a coalition you only half inhabit, agreeing on just over half of its shared votes. Rabbit is your natural ally, especially on welfare and rights; Glasses is the fault line, where housing and governance expose how far your public-service politics outrun theirs.

The open question is whether your isolated social-conservative instincts become a firmer strand, or remain exceptions inside an unusually coherent egalitarian worldview. Ten more votes will unlock a fresher read, and each ballot will make the picture truer.

You want a UK where welfare is protected, power is pushed out of Westminster, and public institutions actively build a fairer, cleaner country rather than merely police it. Your case for the triple lock — that UK pensioners are “among the poorest in Europe” — captures the instinct: solidarity before punishment, investment before retrenchment; the record is still developing, but its direction is unmistakable.

You were the Municipal Socialist; you have become a broader Public-Service Firebrand, holding steady on state protection while sharpening around energy, local power and welfare. You have also shown a practical streak, backing housing delivery and infrastructure even as you reject migration cuts and the idea that “traditional values” need a government advertising campaign.

You split almost evenly with the country, but your clearest breaks are against its harder mood: you reject tougher benefit conditions, scrapping the triple lock and reducing migration. The tension is that your leftism is not uniformly permissive — you opposed decriminalising drugs and the puberty-blocker trial, giving your politics a firm boundary on health and public order.

Your Centre-Right circle is a loose coalition, not a political home: you agree only narrowly overall, while Rabbit is a genuine ally on welfare and Glasses is your sharpest clash on governance. You run alongside your crowd on practical measures, but part company when it turns from delivery to discipline.

Your next ten votes will show whether this becomes a settled state-first creed or a more selective programme of public provision, local control and social restraint. Either way, the picture gets truer every time you vote — and the next read will catch the tension your record leaves open.

You vote for a Britain where ownership sits with the public, not the market — nationalise the utilities, tax the house not the transaction, keep the BBC out of subscription's hands. Your one unanimous conviction, governance, runs through nearly everything: who holds power over pipes, wires and the airwaves matters more to you than almost anything else.

You split down the middle with the country — right with the majority on stamp duty reform and Burnham's Manchester outpost, well against it on nationalising utilities via pension funds and scrapping the BBC licence, both of which the nation backed and you didn't. You're not reflexively contrarian; you just won't follow the crowd when it drifts towards privatisation or punishment.

You agree with the people you follow less than half the time, which for a hard-left voter surrounded by a broadly centrist crowd says more about them than you. Rabbit is your true north — three in four votes in lockstep — while snebzy1 is nearly your mirror opposite, agreeing on barely one vote in five.

Six scored votes is a sketch, not a portrait — the shape says old-school municipal left, but every vote you cast from here fills it in further. Come back next week and this read will know you better than it does today.