SirBoyofLard

You're a right-leaning voter with genuine steel — strongly for NATO spending, sceptical of the JCPOA, unmoved by wealth taxes or restoring the 0.7% aid target — but on housing you defect entirely: rent controls, the Decent Homes Standard, joint council planning, all voted yes. This isn't muddle; it's a worldview where the state polices the borders and the streets hard, and the market gets policed just as hard when it comes to landlords.

Last week you were "The Anti-Metropolitan Royalist" — populist, anti-establishment, hard to pin down. That's sharpened: the anti-monarchy, anti-London instinct has resolved into a clearer hawk-on-everything-except-housing profile, with facial recognition safeguards and police powers both landing yes — tougher on crime, still wary of unchecked state power.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the national mood — siding with the majority barely more often than not. Where you diverge, it's pointed: Britain wanted the 0.7% aid target restored and a stricter cap on donations; you rejected both, unbothered by consensus when it clashes with a right-of-centre instinct.

Bolton West mostly rides with you — near-unanimous on the votes you both cast, from PIP tightening to the Hillsborough Law — but you and your one-voter sample split hard on donation caps and foreign influence rules, where the town said no and national opinion said yes.

Immigration and foreign policy are thin (one and four votes), and you've never touched business, employment or technology at all — big gaps for someone this decided everywhere else. Vote on a few more and this profile gets sharper again next week — especially worth resolving whether that housing rebellion is a one-off or the start of a real pattern.

You're a right-leaning voter who thinks the country's institutions have drifted away from ordinary people — you back the monarchy going (yes to abolishing it) in the same breath as calling white Britons second-class citizens under the authorities meant to protect them, and naming Labour a threat to the Union. This isn't establishment conservatism; it's a populist, anti-London right that wants power and money moved out of the capital, utilities un-privatised, and childcare and child benefit expanded — but has no patience for devolution schemes, PR, or Burnham's "good growth" as the answer.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the national mood — agreeing on planning reform and rewilding, but breaking hard from majorities on Burnham's plan, financial-sector power, and inequality's link to democracy, where the nation leans one way and you plant yourself firmly the other.

Bolton West votes with you almost everywhere — unanimous locally on the monarchy, on London-centrism, on Labour-as-threat — making you less an outlier in your own area than a fairly faithful voice of it, even where you and the rest of Britain disagree.

You've never voted on immigration, housing or foreign policy — striking omissions for someone this vocal on national identity and London's grip on power, and the gap that would sharpen this profile fastest.

This is early days — 29 scored votes give real shape but not the full picture. Cast a few more, especially on immigration and housing, and next week's read will cut closer to the bone.