RoostersBrother

You are a clearly right-wing security conservative, defined less by tax ideology than by control: immigration, defence and foreign policy are your immovable ground. You favour deportation, nuclear strength and higher defence spending, yet you are not simply punitive—your support for adult social-care reform and opposition to voiding unemployed people’s votes reveal a practical streak beneath the discipline.

A while back, you were The Order Conservative; now you are holding steady but sharper-edged, with the border and the nation’s defensive posture more central than institutional restraint. You have also shown a little more independence from the welfare-hardliner script, while remaining deeply suspicious of constitutional entrenchment, devolution and state expansion.

You are neither a reliable majority voter nor a permanent dissenter: your record splits almost evenly against the national mood. You often stand with the country on tougher immigration and benefit scrutiny, but your refusal to strengthen Ukraine, abolish the EHRC or make social-care provision more collective shows where your instincts run ahead of the public.

You run with a broadly right-leaning crowd, agreeing with it more often than not; warmana is your natural ally, especially on immigration and welfare, though the economy separates you. GrahamBurnbyCrouch is the sharp rupture—particularly on the constitution—suggesting your politics are more security-first than consensus-right.

Your open question is whether practical public services can keep softening your hard edge, or whether security will swallow the rest of your politics. Ten more votes will earn a fresher read—and every ballot will make the picture truer.

You are a clearly right-wing voter whose politics begin with order: control immigration, strengthen defence and make welfare harder to take for granted. You are not simply anti-state, though; you backed tighter school basics and more housebuilding, while rejecting both a blanket balanced-budget rule and fashionable nostalgia about “traditional courtesies”.

You were the Fortress Economist; you are now the Order Conservative — holding steady on welfare and defence, but sharper on borders, flags and authority. The newer votes have made your nationalism more explicit, even as your rejection of clean-energy subsidies and local devolution keeps the economic and constitutional fortress intact.

You are neither a reliable mirror nor a permanent dissenter: the country’s majority has often been with you on immigration and security, but against you on housing intervention, farming support and stronger public provision. Your sharpest break is backing a smaller university system while resisting the instinct to balance the books at all costs.

You run with your circle more often than against it, especially with SueMannall, your near-lockstep ally. GrahamBurnbyCrouch is the fault line: your constitutional instincts put you on opposite sides, suggesting that beneath the shared rightward outlook, you have a much harder view of where power should sit.

Your open question is whether this order-first conservatism softens when practical services demand collective action, or hardens into a fuller border-and-authority creed. Ten more votes will sharpen that answer — and make the whole picture truer.

You want a UK that spends more on defence, trusts markets over redistribution, and doesn't apologise for either. Your hardest convictions — defence, welfare, economy — all point the same direction: strong border, strong military, small state elsewhere. You backed nuclear capability and the 3.5% GDP defence push while dismissing UBI and a National Care Service funded by general taxation; you don't think the financial sector has too much power over the economy, and you're not moved by talk of a trillion being "too much" for one man.

You split almost evenly with the national mood — siding with the majority on 12 of 20 votes — which sounds moderate until you see where you break: you rejected the National Care Service the country backed by a landslide, and waved off compulsory road pricing and rewilding schemes most Britons quietly nodded along to. Deportation of foreign offenders and nuclear expansion, though, you share with a large national majority — your right flank is mainstream, your economic scepticism is not.

You run with a Centre-Right crowd and mostly keep step — 64% agreement overall — with SueMannall as a near-total ally, lockstep across eight shared votes. GrahamBurnbyCrouch is the opposite story: total disagreement, the fault line sitting squarely on the constitution, suggesting your circle isn't as unified on devolution and Scotland as it looks on defence.

Twenty votes in, the shape is already sharp — fiscally hard-nosed, defence-first, unmoved by welfare expansion. Keep voting and this profile keeps tightening; the next ballot might be the one that finally tells us where you and Graham could ever agree.