NeillChisman

You want a Britain that taxes the very top, protects disability claimants from tighter assessments, and pours money into the 10-Year Health Plan — a redistributive instinct paired with genuine care for public infrastructure. But you're no uniform leftist: you'd scrap net zero, oppose new regional assemblies, and voted against expanding nuclear defence capability, so this isn't tribal loyalty, it's a worldview built vote by vote.

You align with the national majority on eight of your ten votes — on the wealth tax, the health plan, casino sponsorship bans, you're squarely with the country. But you break hard from Britain's mood on regional devolution (65% of the nation wants it, you don't) and on nuclear defence, where the country's split evenly and you land firmly against.

New Forest East mostly echoes you loudly — unanimous locally on the wealth tax, the health plan, scrapping net zero — though your sample is thin, one vote per question. Still, on PIP tightening and nuclear defence your area sided against you each time, a small but real local friction.

You've never voted on immigration, justice, housing, or education — a striking gap given how much of the current political weather sits there. Fill those in and your profile stops being a sketch and starts being a portrait.

Eight scored votes is early days — enough to see the shape of a tax-the-rich, protect-the-NHS, sceptical-of-devolution voter, but not enough to call it fixed. Cast a few more, especially on immigration or housing, and next week's read will cut sharper.