OrkneyViking

You want a Britain that redistributes hard — wealth taxed, British Steel nationalised, social security fixed at its roots rather than its edges — while stepping back from military hardware: no US tankers on foreign bases, no reclaiming the nuclear deterrent, closer ties to the EU instead of harder borders. It's a left that trusts the state to fix things at home and distrusts it to project force abroad.

Last time you were the Guarded Egalitarian — left on welfare, but happy to gut judicial review for housing and ban extremist parties for order. That illiberal streak has quietly dropped: this round you voted to protect judicial review from being extended into infrastructure projects, trading pragmatic planning for civil-liberties instinct. The anti-nuclear, anti-tanker core, though, hasn't moved an inch.

You split with the country almost exactly down the middle — siding with the majority on half your votes, breaking hardest on the deterrent (86% of Britain wants it back, you don't) and on the triple lock, where you defied the instinct most on your own side share and voted it away.

Your crowd leans Centre Right and you only meet them halfway, agreeing less than half the time across a hundred-plus shared votes. MikeNolan is your rare lockstep partner; PhilipHarris is where you consistently part ways — a circle you run alongside more than with.

Fifteen scored votes is enough to see the shape, not the whole picture — the security-versus-civil-liberties tension you carried in last time has shifted rather than vanished, and every vote you cast this week sharpens whether it settles for good. Come back next week and the read will know you better than you do.

You want a Britain that looks after people — fair pay for care workers, cheaper bills through heat pumps and solar, devolved power kept in local hands — but you don't confuse that with softness. Where most of your side recoils from state power, you'd use it: banning extremist parties, clearing legal obstacles to get infrastructure and housing built faster. Yours is a left that trusts institutions to act, not just to redistribute.

You're often out of step, and comfortably so. The nation voted 66% for expanding nuclear defence — you said no. It wanted the GLA abolished — you defended it. It rejected banning extremist parties by a wide margin — you backed the ban anyway. Four votes out of ten aligned with the majority; the rest of the time you were making a different argument entirely, one closer to security-through-inclusion than security-through-deterrence.

Ten votes, but whole continents of your politics are unmapped — immigration, health, justice, the economy proper, education. Right now you're legible on devolution, energy and welfare and a mystery everywhere else; the next round of votes on tax, the NHS or crime will tell us whether the guarded-egalitarian instinct holds or splinters.

This is early days — six scored votes is a sketch, not a portrait, and the housing/judicial-review vote already hints at a pragmatic streak worth testing further. Vote on a few more of those gaps and we'll come back next week with a sharper, truer read.