Nemo

You vote for a greener, more equal and more open UK: expansive on welfare, rights, immigration and international responsibility, suspicious of punitive politics, and willing to challenge inherited power. Your distinctive thread is democratic and ecological conviction — renewable energy, foreign aid, electoral reform and a more inclusive public life — grounded in practical solidarity, from universal basic income to rehabilitation rather than retribution.

You have moved from The Green Ballot Firebrand to a more seasoned ecological democrat: the green internationalism remains, while immigration, justice and welfare have sharpened leftwards. Your newer votes also bring authority into clearer focus — opposing NHS strike bans and pepper spray, supporting rehabilitation, litter penalties and equal employment support — with governance now centred rather than centre-right.

You are about as likely to resist the national mood as follow it, which makes you an independent left voter rather than a tribal one. You stood against majorities on asylum politics, Sharia Councils, monarchy, donations and universal basic income, while joining the country on scrapping non-crime hate incidents and proscribing Palestine Action.

You run with your circle only loosely: agreement is a working relationship, not a political home. DavidCrosby is your closest ally, aligned on energy and employment, though transport and business divide you; Slawomir is the sharpest clash, especially on health and immigration.

Your next ten votes will show whether ecological internationalism remains your organising principle as your views on authority keep settling. The picture sharpens every time you vote, and the next read will make that long arc truer still.

You vote for a greener, more open and more equal UK: protective of refugees, hostile to welfare scapegoating, sceptical of punishment, and impatient with inherited authority. Your defining combination is planetary politics with democratic urgency — renewable energy, restored foreign aid, an elected head of state and stronger press regulation — though you still want institutions to work rather than simply be swept away.

You were The Planetary Democrat; you have not abandoned that green internationalism, but you have sharpened into a more electorally hard-edged version of it. Recent votes pushed you further left on immigration, welfare, justice and energy, while one governance vote pulled you into the Centre Right: a small but revealing reminder that your reformism is not reflexively anti-authority.

You are neither a comfortable member of the left-wing majority nor a habitual contrarian: across recent votes, you have matched the UK about as often as you have opposed it. The tension is telling — you reject foreign-benefit restrictions and replacing the Refugee Convention even when the national mood strongly favours them, yet join the country on first-cousin marriage restrictions and military firmness.

You run with your Centre-leaning circle more often than not, but never in lockstep. DavidCrosby is your natural ally — especially on energy and elections — while Slawomir is the sharpest clash, with immigration and health exposing the distance; transport and business show that even your closest alignment has limits.

Your next ten votes will test whether this is a lasting move toward sharper institutional scepticism or simply a green internationalist holding firm under pressure. Keep voting: the portrait gets truer with every ballot, and the next read will show which side of that tension wins.

You vote for a greener, more equal UK: public ownership over private profit, humane borders, stronger rights and a fairer distribution of power. But this is not soft-focus idealism; you back aid, climate priorities, proportional representation and international solidarity while remaining wary of constitutional upheaval and instinctively firm on defence and order.

You were The Green Solidarity Firebrand; you have become a more institutionally cautious, selectively hard-edged version of the same left internationalist. You have pushed further left on rights, but edged back towards the centre on constitutional change and taken a noticeable rightward step on immigration — a sharper tension, not a change of heart.

You are almost exactly as likely to resist the national majority as join it, which makes you less tribal than your left label implies. You backed restoring foreign aid and rejected religious-slaughter bans against the grain, yet sometimes shared the country’s harder instincts on labelling, public safety and whole-life sentences.

You run with your circle only loosely: the average relationship is moderate agreement, not lockstep. DavidCrosby is your natural ally on energy and elections, though you part ways on transport and business; Slawomir is your sharpest clash, especially over immigration and health, despite common ground on housing.

Your open question is whether the cautious institutionalist or the internationalist will win the next constitutional and immigration tests. Ten more votes will refresh the portrait, and every vote makes this unusually distinctive record truer.

Your politics are built around solidarity rather than retreat: protect people from exclusion, defend the environment, return essential services such as water to public control, and resist the easy politics of punishment. You distrust coercion, but not a capable state — even when that means press regulation, climate mandates or stronger protections for rights.

You were The Constitutional Green Insurgent; you are holding that identity, but with sharper edges. Since that read, welfare, rights, the economy and justice have all moved further left: you have become less tolerant of market discipline and punitive answers, while still making room for fitness standards and a firm constitutional settlement.

You are a genuine cross-current: the nation often favours tougher borders, harsher welfare rules and more punishment, while you repeatedly choose the humane alternative. Yet you are not simply anti-majoritarian — you sided with the country on keeping the UK together and rejected Scottish independence-by-default, a distinctly establishment-minded instinct inside an otherwise insurgent record.

You run with your circle only loosely, agreeing on just over half of shared votes. DavidCrosby is your ally on energy and personnel but not transport or business; Slawomir is the real fault line, with housing in common but immigration and health pulling you sharply apart.

Your next ten votes will show whether this is a settled solidarity politics or a new phase of economic hardening; the picture only gets truer each time you vote.

You are a green internationalist with a constitutional streak: an open, plural UK, public ownership where markets have failed, stronger rights, proportional representation and a welfare state that does not confuse punishment with order. Your sharpest conviction is that the country should become more inclusive and more democratic at once — though your defence-first instinct remains a real wrinkle in the picture.

You were The Open-Border Ecological Firebrand; you have not abandoned that generous internationalism, but you have become more institutionally insurgent — backing a written constitution, a ceremonial monarchy and public water ownership. Holding steady on migration and climate, you now sound less like a protester outside the system and more like someone trying to rebuild it.

You are often voting against the national mood on borders, welfare and constitutional reform, while joining the country on practical help for farmers and public control of water. The tension is telling: you reject more military spending over climate adaptation, yet your wider record is clearly more comfortable with defence than your left instincts might suggest.

You run somewhat with your Centre-leaning circle, but not obediently. DavidCrosby is your closest ally — especially on energy and immigration — while Slawomir is your sharpest clash, most notably over immigration; even your shared ground on housing cannot close that distance.

Your next ten votes will test whether constitutional reform becomes your organising cause, or remains one strand of a broader green-left vision — and each vote will make the picture truer.

You want a greener, more generous UK: open to migrants, protective of rights, serious about climate action, and willing to build council homes and defend public services. But this is not soft-focus idealism; you reject welfare cuts, firearms and border militarisation while still expecting institutions to work and governments to spend intelligently.

You have moved from The Ecological Humanist Enforcer to a more fully fledged open-border ecological firebrand: the compassion has held, but your resistance to the new politics of exclusion has sharpened. You even break with the national mood on leaving the ECHR, capping migration and deploying troops at borders, while keeping one foot in order-minded scepticism.

You are roughly as likely to stand against the UK majority as with it, but the pattern is clear: you resist the country’s harder turn on migration, identity and punishment. Your sharpest contradiction is voting for tolerance and inclusion while insisting that climate spending, the NHS and public administration must show results.

Your circle is only a loose fit, and you are more left-wing than its Centre average. DavidCrosby is your natural ally on immigration and energy, though you part company on defence and transport; Slawomir is the real clash, especially over immigration, despite shared ground on housing.

Your next ten votes will show whether institutional discipline remains a supporting principle or becomes a larger part of your left politics; every ballot makes this portrait truer.

You want a greener, more humane UK: open to migrants, protective of rights, serious about climate action and willing to tax power to fund fairness. But this is not soft-focus idealism; you reject mass deportation and an ICE-style force while still backing tougher standards, school accountability and a state that can enforce its promises.

You were The Open-Border Ecological Dissenter; now you are that same ecological humanist with a sharper appetite for competence and order. The recent record reinforces your climate and immigration convictions, while your defence of SATs and identifying children at risk of unemployment makes the old compassion-versus-discipline tension more explicit.

You are broadly out of step with the country on migration, climate and criminal justice, yet not simply anti-majority: you backed the government’s record, parliamentary democracy and the legal protection of identity. Your striking contradiction is siding with the left on foreign prisoners while taking a harder line than many progressives on educational standards.

You run with your circle only loosely, agreeing just over half the time; DavidCrosby is your natural ally, especially on immigration and energy, but education and transport divide you. Slawomir is the real counterweight: you meet on housing, then part sharply over immigration and health.

Your next ten votes will test whether humane internationalism can coexist with a stronger insistence on standards, enforcement and national capacity—and the picture will sharpen every time you cast one.

You want a more generous, greener UK: open to migrants, serious about climate, public housing and international responsibility, but not indulgent about institutions or criminal justice. You can vote for more defence spending and reject early release while still calling diversity “our strength” — a humanitarian leftist with a disciplinary streak.

You were The Borderless Green Humanist; now you are sharper and more politically battle-tested, turning principle into resistance against welfare bans, anti-migrant narratives and American dependence. The old scepticism about spending has narrowed, though prison policy and defence remain your revealing rightward exceptions.

You are often the country’s dissenter on immigration: opposing welfare restrictions on migrants and the idea that migration explains grooming scandals when most voters go the other way. Yet you are not simply anti-majoritarian — you backed council housing, HS2 and bank taxes where the UK was broadly with you.

You run slightly ahead of your Centre-leaning circle rather than living in lockstep with it. DavidCrosby is your natural ally on immigration and energy, but you part ways on transport and education; Slawomir is the sharpest clash, especially over immigration and health.

Your open thread is whether defence and punishment stay principled exceptions or pull you towards a tougher left politics. Ten more votes will sharpen that answer — and make this living portrait truer than the last.

You want a more humane, greener UK: open to newcomers, serious about climate, protective of rights and sceptical of punishment as politics. But you are no automatic tax-and-spend progressive; you reject the death penalty and small-boat militarism while still resisting an unconditional welfare state and refusing to treat national debt as sacred. Your leftism is moral before it is economic.

A while back, you were The Open-Border Disciplinarian; you have held the open-border conviction, but the disciplinarian has receded behind a broader humanist instinct. The new record is sharper on equal treatment, diversity and restraint in state power, even as your selective hard edge survives on social care and public accountability.

You are about as likely to resist the national majority as join it, which makes you less a contrarian than an independent moral voter. You part company with the UK most clearly on immigration, climate and criminal justice: where others see borders, punishment or cultural anxiety, you see human consequences and long-term stewardship.

You run only loosely with your Centre-leaning circle. DavidCrosby is your closest ally, especially on immigration and energy, but you split on justice and defence; Slawomir is the real fault line, with disagreement concentrated on immigration and constitutional instincts. Your loyalties are to principles, not to the crowd you follow.

Your open thread is whether the remaining disciplinarian will harden around welfare and public finances, or yield to the same humane logic that guides your rights and climate votes. Ten more votes will sharpen the picture—and make this portrait truer than the last.

You want an open, greener and more equal UK, with justice applied firmly rather than sentimentally. You reject the politics of “reverse immigration” and culture-war panic, while still backing criminal disqualification for politicians, scrutinising welfare and refusing to treat every public service as beyond challenge. Your leftism is principled, not permissive: environmental improvement, human rights and social protection matter, but so do competence and consequences.

A while back you were The Egalitarian Enforcer; you have not abandoned that core, but you have become more visibly an environmental and anti-nativist dissenter. The newer votes sharpen the contrast: resisting migration cuts and cultural traditionalism, while siding with the right on the triple lock, capital gains and drugs, and even opposing rent controls.

You are almost exactly the nation’s awkward equal: the UK majority has gone with you about as often as against you. That makes your convictions more interesting than simple opposition—on migration, climate and university access you stand against the prevailing mood, yet you can join the majority when the question is clean energy, water-company restraint or barring serious offenders from office.

You run with your circle only loosely, agreeing just over half the time. DavidCrosby is your closest ally, especially on rights and immigration, but you part ways on education and justice; Slawomir is the real fault line, where shared ground on housing and defence gives way to a sharp immigration clash.

Your open question is whether the disciplinarian in you will keep tempering the egalitarian, or whether climate and migration will pull you further left. Ten more votes will unlock a fresher read—and every ballot will make this unusual combination harder to mistake.

You want a Britain that expands rights, welcomes immigrants into the safety net, and hands power outward — to Manchester, to Holyrood, to a National Care Service — while still expecting the law to fall equally on everyone, cultural sensitivities be damned. It's an old-fashioned egalitarianism: generous on who belongs, strict on how order is kept.

Last time you were "The Careful Centrist" — thin record, unmoved by the noise. Forty-four scored votes later, that caution has resolved into conviction: rights, immigration and governance are now unanimous or near-unanimous left calls, not hedges. The welfare tension hasn't vanished, though — you still back overhauling PIP and abolishing tuition fees while balking at a wealth tax and pension-funded nationalisation.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the country — siding with the majority on nuclear power and defence spending, but pulling away on punitive instincts, rejecting the death penalty and a benefits purge the nation half-supported.

Minfyourbuisness is your steadiest ally, in step on defence and energy even where you part on housing. Slawomir is the friction point — you agree barely half the time, and the split lands exactly on Rights and Governance, the convictions you hold hardest.

Vote on, and this sharpens — especially the welfare fault line still humming under the surface. A new read lands every week, truer each time.

You want a Britain that's humane where it costs the state little and firm where it doesn't — strong on judicial discretion, unmoved by burka bans, but ready to tighten PIP awards and cool on funding an earlier retirement through higher National Insurance. It's a worldview built on caution rather than crusade: protect the vulnerable in principle, mind the bill in practice.

You're rarely the outlier — eight of your last ten votes landed with the national majority, on digital ID, greenbelt housing, online voting. But you broke from the crowd on judges' sentencing discretion and the burka, sitting to the left of a country that voted the other way on both.

You agree with the people you follow only just over half the time — closer to a coin toss than a tribe. Emmansonjacktrick is your nearest ally, though even that's a modest 60%; DavidCrosby, your sharpest clash, splits with you as often as not. You're not really running with a pack here — you're voting your own instincts and they happen to overlap sometimes.

Six scored votes is early days — enough to catch the tension between your soft-left instincts and your hard line on welfare, not yet enough to know which one wins when they collide. Keep voting and the picture sharpens — this read updates weekly, and it's only going to get truer.