Motherdragon

You want a more equal, public-minded UK: open to migrants, protective of rights, sceptical of punishment, and willing to put water, housing and welfare before profit. Your politics are not merely economically left; they are a moral refusal to turn vulnerable people into scapegoats — “delighted to be woke” is not a pose but a declaration of allegiance.

You were The Borderless Rights Firebrand; you are now a broader solidarity socialist, adding public ownership, council housing and proportional representation to the original rights-first creed. The core has held, but you have sharpened your refusal of migration scapegoating while revealing one live contradiction: you support entrenched rights in principle, yet recently rejected writing a UK constitution into law.

You sit against the national grain as often as with it, especially on borders, defence, firearms and criminal justice. Yet you are not reflexively contrarian: you joined the country on public water, royal restraint and NHS pessimism, while your opposition to leaving the ECHR puts solidarity above the popular demand for harder borders.

Your Centre-Right circle is a poor ideological home, and you agree with it only about half the time. rjane is your closest ally, matching you on immigration and housing but dividing over health and energy; CJB1970 is the sharpest clash, sharing your constitutional instincts while parting company on immigration and rights.

Your next ten votes will test whether universal solidarity can coexist with the occasional instinct for restriction and institutional scepticism; the picture will sharpen every time you cast one.

You vote for a more generous, less punitive UK: council homes over market fixes, welfare without suspicion, strong rights and a state willing to redistribute power and wealth. Your deepest instinct is internationalist and anti-coercive — against deportation, military expansion and the idea that migration explains every failing service — summed up in your own words: “Woke = just being a decent person.” There is one telling wrinkle: you backed religious schools and restrictions on overseas property buyers, showing that even your universalism has limits when institutions or reciprocity enter the frame.

You have moved from The Rights-First Firebrand to a broader borderless radical: the old rights-first instinct remains, but your record now joins it to council-house building, land-value taxation and a firm refusal of migration scapegoating. You are holding steady on punishment and state power, while becoming sharper about who gets to belong.

You are often voting against the national mood: the UK tends to favour tighter borders, higher defence spending and tougher responses to crime, while you reject all three. Your instinct is not merely left-wing but counter-majoritarian — especially on immigration and justice.

Your Centre-Right circle is barely your political home, with rjane your clear ally on housing and elections but not health or energy. CJB1970 is the real fault line: you meet on housing and constitutional reform, then part decisively on immigration and rights.

Your open question is whether your expansive rights politics can absorb the occasional institutional or reciprocity-based restriction; ten more votes will sharpen that tension and make the whole picture truer.

You vote for an expansive, protective UK: generous welfare, open to migrants, serious about rights, and willing to fund education and social care through collective means. Your instincts are consistently anti-punitive — against benefit surveillance, the death penalty, militarised borders and job-based disenfranchisement — while your defence of “being woke” is really a defence of decency against organised cruelty.

You have moved from The Sanctuary Disciplinarian to The Rights-First Firebrand: the earlier hard line on corrupt or unfit office-holders has not become a wider law-and-order turn. If anything, your latest votes have clarified the principle beneath it — accountability for power, mercy for the vulnerable, and rights that should not depend on popularity.

You are roughly as likely to oppose the national majority as join it, but the disagreements are revealing: the UK backed naval force against small boats, tougher benefit checks and a return of capital punishment; you rejected all three. Your one notable break with the left is economic and practical rather than moral — you have defended the pension triple lock and resisted making housing harder for ordinary buyers.

Your Centre-Right circle is a political mismatch, not a home: you agree with it only half the time. rjane is the exception, with shared ground on elections and housing, while CJB1970 is your sharpest clash — especially on justice and rights.

Your next ten votes will test whether your standards for public integrity can coexist with your instinct for leniency; each ballot will sharpen the portrait and make the next read truer.

You vote for a more equal UK: generous welfare, progressive taxation, strong rights, public education and an open approach to immigration, with justice built around rehabilitation rather than punishment. But your compassion has a hard edge: you backed permanently barring serious offenders from public office, suggesting you want mercy for citizens and exacting standards from power.

You have moved from The Decarceral Welfarist to The Sanctuary Disciplinarian: the old anti-punitive, pro-redistribution core is intact, but your outlook now reaches more clearly into immigration, education and institutional reform. You have not softened; you have become more complete — and revealed that even your leftism has limits when public trust is at stake.

You are a genuine counter-majoritarian, landing with the UK about as often as against it while standing firm on migration, the EHRC, welfare protection and progressive social questions. “Delighted to be woke” is not just rhetoric here: you treat decency as a political principle, even when the nation’s mood turns harsher.

Your Centre-Right circle is a poor ideological home, and you agree with it less than half the time. rjane is your useful bridge on elections and housing, though you split on health and energy; CJB1970 is the real fault line, especially on justice and elections.

Your next ten votes should test whether the new rule-of-law edge is a lasting principle or a one-off exception. Keep voting: this already distinctive picture will sharpen into something even truer with every ballot.

You're voting for a UK that punishes less and provides more: scrap the death penalty, don't make prisoners pay for their own cells, decriminalise drugs, restore maintenance grants, tax wealth to fund social care. Welfare, justice and education are where your convictions are strongest and most uniform — this isn't drift, it's doctrine.

Last time you were the Peace-Dividend Leftist, defined mostly by refusing to fund rearmament. That instinct is still there — no to gunboats in the Channel, no to the "biggest peacetime rearmament" — but it's no longer your headline. With justice and education votes now in the picture, you've sharpened into someone whose core case isn't anti-military so much as anti-punishment: decriminalise, don't incarcerate, don't means-test.

You ran against the grain more than with it, agreeing with the national majority on fewer than half of your recent votes — rejecting rearmament, benefit conditionality, the triple-lock scrap and gunboats even as most voters backed them. When the country did move your way — banning company donations to parties, the wealth tax — you were there first.

Your circle leans Centre Right, and it shows: you agree with them less than half the time. rjane is your real ally, in step on elections and housing though you part on health and energy; CJB1970 is your sharpest clash, especially on justice — no surprise, given how firmly you hold that line.

This is a hard-left profile with real edges, but immigration and energy remain thin — more votes there will tell us whether your welfarism holds when those fault lines get harder. Vote on, and next week's read gets sharper still.

You want a Britain of public utilities back in public hands, a scrapped two-child cap, and a monarchy quietly retired — the classic social-democratic settlement, funded by taxing wealth rather than arming up. Your no to an extra £15bn for defence, cast against a nation voting three-to-one the other way, is the clearest signal of who you are: welfare state first, warfare state a distant second.

You split almost evenly with the national mood — on side for nationalising utilities and scrapping the benefit cap, off it when the country wants NHS reform along European lines or more defence cash. You're not reflexively contrarian; you just don't flinch from breaking with a landslide when it clashes with your convictions, as with your lone-ish no on defence spending.

No local data has come through yet — too early to say whether you're your town's echo or its outlier. That's a gap worth closing.

Sixteen scored votes is a real but partial picture, and whole fronts — immigration, energy, justice, education — are untouched. For someone this settled on economy and defence, staying silent on immigration and justice leaves an obvious hole in the story.

This is early days, but the throughline — public ownership over privilege, restraint over rearmament — is already unmistakable. Cast a few more votes, especially on the topics you've dodged, and next week's read will cut sharper still.